Related
I about to take some courses in Pattern Recognition.
As i have no prior knowledge in either C or C++, my professors told me to learn a bit of one of them before the course, and learn more when doing the course.
Which one should i pick?
The prior knowledge in programming i have is limited to mostly C# but some PHP, SQL and Prolog as well.
The choice of a low-level language like C or C++ probably means you are into performance at the cost of the development time.
If this is your first low-level language, then learn C. It is simple, robust and proven language, and it allows to write the fast code. It has a decades long record of portability. It is much easier to integrate C code with code written in other languages. With C++ it is too easy to make things wrong. C++ requires much greater degree of language mastery and much more programmer's attention to make things right. While it is possible to write fast code in C++, it's more of an art than doing the same thing in C.
If you have only a few months to learn, then at the end you'll be able to write an OK C code, but this time is simply not enough to get enough experience with C++, hence your C++ code written in the first year or two will be awful.
See, for example, severe criticism of C++ from Linus Torvalds: C++ is a horrible language and C++ productivity. Basically, it boils down to C++ being too complicated even for professional programmers, and C++ code being ambiguous with context-dependent behaviour (this may be considered a higher-level language feature, but it makes more difficult to reason about the performance).
One of the major open source libraries for computer vision, OpenCV, is available both for C and C++, but it is also available for Python, which is a much easier language to get the things done quickly (and also to learn as a first language). BTW, I assume if you manage to offload most of the work to the library, which itself is written in C/C++, the performance cost of Python won't be huge (but generally Python is 10x slower than C).
Stroustrup (inventor of C++) argues that C++ is easier to learn than C:
There will be less type errors to catch manually […] fewer tricks to learn […], and better libraries available.
With that in mind, go for C++.
C and C++ are fundamentally different in the way they approach programming. If you have experience with C#, C++ would be a choice since it is object oriented as well. Also, even though they are different, knowing C++ will let you read (and mostly understand) C code as well. Also, check out this question for some information on the differences between these languages.
I would recommend learning C++ as this probably be easiest if you know about classes etc from C#. Also you can write free functions in C++ but is harder to write classes in C.
A standard library you will likely use is opencv.
C# will set you in good stead to master C/C++. You will probably be able to see through the opencv code examples and understand them.
You can likely get by with enough C you pick up from working through the examples and becoming familiar with them. The focus of the course will be on the algorithms and not how fancy your code is.
Sounds like a fun course! Good luck.
This may seem a trivial question, but it's one that's bothered me a lot lately. Why do some programmers refer to "C++/STL" like it's a different language? The STL is part of the C++ standard library -- and therefore is part of the language, "C++". It's not a separate component, and it does not live alone in the scope of things C++. Yet some continually act like it's a different language altogether. Why?
It's possible to be a competent and experienced C++ programmer and never use the STL. You may be using Boost or ACE, or been an MFC windows programmer for 10 years.
If you want someone experienced in using the STL, asking for someone who knows C++ is no guarantee that you'll get one.
Also for my mind, writing code that's heavily dependent on the STL feels very different to writing, say, MFC code. They might as well be different languages. They certainly won't look particularly similar.
An understanding of the STL isn't necessary to understand C++. It's useful to have when you need ADTs, but you can go (could have gone?) through your whole C++ career without needing it.
The above answers are really good; I'm only going to add to their content in a broader context.
Developers might refer to language/api|library e.g. C/Win32, Java/Struts, Java/Spring, C#/.net MVC because there are in essence two knowledge bases - knowledge of the language in question and knowledge of how to use that specific library, API or framework. Something like Win32 is pretty huge, as is say Django, which I'm currently learning. Django itself works in a very specific way and knowing that is what I'm learning, not Python.
The same is true of C++/MFC or C++/Boost or C++/STL. The language is C++ - the API/library you're using is MFC, Boost or STL.
Probably because STL came a little late to the C++ game, and many people have written code that does not use any STL. For example, think early win32 programming with MFC.
Guess:
When C++ was first released, the STL did not exist. It came into existence later as an optional addition and then was incorporated into the standard.
When writing a resume, people would often list C/C++ as a language, which, in many cases means they don't know either.
Sometime resumes would list "Visual C++" as a language, trying to indicate they don't know what a language is.
This, together with "great knowledge of C++ and PHP" statements, go strait into recycle bin at my firm. Not because they are necessarily bad programmers - but because the interview time waste is not worth it.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 13 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Why artificially limit your code to C?
I started off with learning C, but then jumped straight into C++ simply because it supports OO and was also required for subsequent work. However, some companies insist on employing people with particularly strong C experience - and I've noticed this applies especially to hardware driver development companies.
C string handling is very different than C++ typical string code. Certainly I wouldn't want any C++ string near my drivers!
More specifically, in good, modern C++ you don't really have to understand pointers and handle buffers at low level; but these are basic and crucial skills in device driver code.
Yes, it's possible to write good drivers in C++; but that C++ would really look like C with a few extra features. Most of the C++ library has no place in deviceland.
It could simply be that they do not have a C++ compiler for the platform they are working with... Personally I would always use C++ in preference to C.
C is much more portable - under the current level of standardization of C++, it simply can't be used when portability is important. It is also very hard for C++ code to be integrated (in a reliable and portable manner) into a C environment.
A lot of embedded systems such as microcontrollers, PLCs, etc use C and not C++ because they don't need to have classes just one giant loop with some functions sprinkled about. Nothing fancy but enough to get the job done in a higher-level language. Since C is more familiar to people than assembly, it works well in ~98% of cases.
I think that the reason is fairly simple, a lot of companies want efficient readable code. C is a fairly easy language to understand and grasp, and for many uses there is no reason to complicate development and code continuity by adding whole new concepts (classes, polymorphism, inheritance, etc) that OO languages make possible but may not be needed.
My question is: Is learning C++ without learning C enough to program any kind of computer programs and get the computer to it`s maximum level (Full Control except the tasks that need Assembly language)?
Thank you
Yes, there is no point in learning C first if you want to learn C++. They are two different languages and learning C first is not a requirement.
Everything you can do in C you can do in C++ (probably in a safer way too)
I think the important question to ask is 'What do you want to do?'
There are many tasks and situations where neither C or C++ are exactly appropriate. They also present quite a steep learning curve and do not lend themselves to fast results.
If you are starting out I would recommend a simpler language such as Python (or even PHP for web stuff) but don't take my word for it and ask about - form your own opinion.
Knowing C is useful as it lets you know in greater depth what the computer is actually doing, but for the sake of productivity (and your sanity) it's probably best going with something a bit more high-level to start with.
This reminds me of the question "Should I learn driving with manual transmission (stick shift) to drive a truck or automatic transmission to drive a car". Different skill sets and usage really. With C you "think" procedurally. With C++ you "think" of Objects. Your entire program is structures differently. True, the "syntax" of C++ is a super-set of C but these are really two different languages. Because most C++ compilers also compile C code, there is a common misunderstanding that C++ is just an extension of C. This is only true about the syntax not the concept. For example, you use the same alphabet to write in English and French but the languages are very different.
I hope this helps.
C++ is a great place to start and yes, you can do everything with it. There's no advantage to learning C unless you are planning on working on platforms where it is particularly well suited, such as embedded electronics.
If you master C++ as a language and the OO concepts behind it you will have no difficulty picking up any other programming language. What's more you'll have a much better appreciation for memory management than you would get if you started with a slightly higher level language such as Java.
Good luck.
I think it all depends on the platform you wish to develop for.
If you want to develop applications on the Mac or iPhone you need to use the Cocoa and Cocoa Touch frameworks which are (mostly) written in Objective-C.
If you want to develop games for most consoles you need to use the native frameworks which are almost all written in C++.
I'm not sure what the Windows frameworks use, but I'd guess at C++.
The language you use is secondary to the frameworks you'll need to use for the platform you're developing for.
Yes, C++ is (pretty much) a superset of C
C++ is include all of C features and more other features like the support of OOP, so the answer is Yes you can.
it's different languages..
chose depending that you want to do...
Yes, you can start learning C++. Start with non-OOP part of C++, which is similar to C. Then you can move to the OOP part. Most of the books teaching C++ from ground up follow this approach.
me just learn c++ but
no problem in understanding c
c++ is much more supportive and safe than c.
although it is a puls puls version...
C++ is all that C is, and then more, so using C++ will not prevent you from doing anything with the computer that you can do in C (although it will in some cases prevent you from writing what in C would normally be an error in any case because C++ compilers use stronger type checking).
Now with respect to "Full Control"; there are some tasks that are the responsibility of the OS, and modern OS's will prevent you from having full control at user level (because processes have to play nicely together). Of course if you are coding for an embedded target, or writing a bootloader or OS, or a kernel mode driver, then you do have full control; and that is why C and C++ are used predominantly for such tasks because they are intrinsically systems-level languages.
I think any language is just medium of expressing one's logic, the main thing is your logic which needs to be perfect. First of all you must understand what are the features that could be explored in C++ that are not available in C.
C is known for its simplicity. If you start learning C, you will very well understand that how crisp and clear this language is. However, it is not a compulsion that you should learn C first and then C++; Its just a recommendation.
Learning C first is like playing level 1 of a game, where C++ is level 2 :-)
Having said that you can always play level 2 directly and can equally succeed in that, but with a little difficulty. :-)
I started by learning C++ and it was fine.
However it wouldn't hurt to have a browse through C before diving into C++. Loosely speaking C is a subset and you will learn the fundamentals there. C++ tends to have some tricky topics to grasp so you'll be safer by having strong foundations.
If you are starting programming, I would say start with C. It will give many basics and will let you think in a more low-level way than starting C++. You do not need to be the boss in C, just get the basics that will help in the future.
There is a nice article written by Joel Spolsky (joelonsoftware.com) that talks about how to start.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I've seen a lot of questions around that use improperly the expression "C/C++".
The reasons in my opinion are:
Newbie C and C++ programmers probably don't understand the difference between the two languages.
People don't really care about it since they want a generic, quick and "dirty" answer
While C/C++ could sometimes be interpreted as "either C or C++", I think it's a big error. C and C++ offer different approaches to programming, and even if C code can be easily implemented into C++ programs I think that referring to two separate languages with that single expression ( C/C++ ) is wrong.
It's true that some questions can be considered either as C or C++ ones, anyway.
What do you think about it?
C/C++ is a holdout from the early days of C++, where they were much more similar than they were today. It's something that wasn't really wrong at first, but is getting more-so all the time.
The basic structure is similar enough that most simple questions do still work between the two, though. There is an entire Wikipedia article on this topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibility_of_C_and_C%2B%2B
The biggest fallacy that comes from this is that because someone is well-versed in C, they will be equally good at C++.
Please remember that the original implementations of C++ were simply as a pre-compiler that output C code for the 'real' compiler. All C++ concepts can be manually coded (but not compiler-enforced) in plain C.
"C/C++" is also valid when referring to compilers and other language/programming tools. Virtually every C++ compiler available will compile either - and are thus referred to as "C/C++" compilers. Most have options on whether to treat .C and .CPP files based on the extension, or compile all of them as C or all of them as C++.
Also note that mixing C and C++ source in a single compiler project was possible from the very first C/C++ compiler. This is probably the key factor in blurring the line between the languages.
Many language/programming tools that are created for C++ also work on C because the language syntax is virtually identical. Many language tools have separate Java, C#, Python versions - but they have a single "C/C++" version that works for C and C++ due to the strong similarities.
We in our company have noticed the following curious fact: if a job applicant writes in his CV about "advanced C/C++ knowledge", there is usually a good chance that he really knows neither ;)
The two languages are distinct, but they have a lot in common. A lot of C code would compile just fine on a C++ compiler. At the early-student level, a lot of C++ code would still work on a C compiler.
Note that in some circumstances the meaning of the code may differ in very subtle ways between the two compilers, but I suppose that's true in some circumstances even between different brands of C++ compiler if you're foolish enough to rely on undefined or contested/non-conformant behavior.
Yes and no.
C and C++ share a lot in common (in fact, the majority of C is a subset of C++).
But C is more oriented "imperating programming", whereas C++, in addition to C paradigm, has more paradigms easily accessible, like functional programing, generic programing, object oriented programing, metaprograming.
So I see the "C/C++" item saying either as "the intersection of C and C++" or "familiarity with C programing as well as C++ programing", depending on the context.
Now, the two languages are really different, and have different solutions to similar problems. A C developer would find it difficult to "parse/understand" a C++ source, whereas a C++ developer would not easily recognize the patterns used in a C source.
Thus, if you want to see how far the C is from the C++ in the "C/C++" expression, a good comparison would be the GTK+ C tutorials, and the same in C++ (GTKmm):
C : GTK+ Hello World: http://library.gnome.org/devel/gtk-tutorial/stable/c39.html#SEC-HELLOWORLD
C++ : GTKmm Hello World: http://www.gtkmm.org/docs/gtkmm-2.4/docs/tutorial/html/sec-helloworld.html
Reading those sources is quite enlightening, as they are, as far as I parsed them, producing exactly the same thing, the "same" way (as far as the languages are concerned).
Thus, I guess the C/C++ "expression" can quite be expressed by the comparison of those sources.
:-)
The conclusion of all this is that it is Ok if used on the following contexts:
describing the intersection of C and C++
describing familiarity with C programing as well as C++ programing
describing compatible code
But it would not be for:
justifying keeping to code in a subset of C++ (or C) for candy compatibility with C (or C++) when compatibility is not desired (and in most C++ project, it is not desired because quite limitating).
asserting that C and C++ can/should be coded the same way (as NOT shown by the GTK+/GTKmm example above)
I think it's more of the second answer - they want something that's easily integrated into their project.
While a C answer may not be idiomatic C++ (and vice versa), I think that's one of C++'s big selling points - you can basically embed C into it. If an idiomatic answer is important, they can always specify C/C++/C++ with STL/C++ with boost/etc.
An answer in lisp is going to be pretty unusable. But an answer in either C or C++ will be directly usable.
Yeah, C/C++ is pretty useless. It seems to be a term mostly used by C++ newbies. We C-only curmudgeons just say "C" and the experienced C++ folks know how much it has diverged from C and so they properly say "C++".
Even if C is (nearly) a subset of C++, this doesn't really have any bearing on their actual usage. Practically every interesting C feature is frowned upon in modern C++ code:
C pointers (use iterators/smart pointers/references instead), macros (use templates and inline functions instead), stdio (use iostreams instead), etc. etc.
So, as Alex Jenter put it, it's unlikely that anyone who knows either language well would say C/C++. Saying that you know how to program in "C/C++" is like saying you know how to program in "Perl/PHP"... sure they've got some significant similarities, but the differences in how they are actually used are vast.
C/C++ often means a programiing style, which is like C and classes, or C and STL :-) Technicaly it is C++, but minimum of its advantages are used.
I agree. I read the C tag RSS feed, and I see tons of C++ questions come through that really don't have anything to do with C.
I also see this exchange a lot:
Asker: How do you do this in C?
Answer: Use the X library for C++.
Asker: OK, how about someone actually answer my question in C?
I use that term myself, and it is because it is my style, I don't use boost, stl or some other things, not even standard C++ libs, like "cout" and "cin", I program C but using classes, templates and other (non-library) features to my advantage.
I can say that I am not a master of C, neither a master of C++, but I am really good at that particular style that I use since 10 years ago. (and I am still improving!)
I was under the impression that all c code is valid c++ code.
Isn’t saying “C/C++” wrong?
No, it isn't. Watcom International Corporation for example, founded more than 25 years ago, called their set of C and C++ compilers and tools "Watcom C/C++", and this product is still developed and available in the open-source form as OpenWatcom C/C++
If it is a complex question needing to write more than one function, yes, it can be wrong.
If it is just to ask a detail about sprintf or bit manipulation, I think it can be legitimate (the latter can even be tagged C/C++/Java/C#, I suppose...).
Whoever is asking the question should write C, C++ or C/C++ depending on the question.
From what I've seen, you can write C++ code the C way or the C++ way. Both work, but C++ code that is not written C style is usually easier to maintain in the long run.
In the end, it all depends on the particular question. If someone is asking how to concatenate strings, than it is very important whether he wants C or C++ solution. Or, another example, if someone is asking for a qsort algorithm. To support different types, you might want to use macros with C and templates with C++, etc.
This was too long for a comment, so I had to make it an answer, but it's in response to Jeff B's answer.
Please remember that the original
implementations of C++ were simply as
a pre-compiler that output C code for
the 'real' compiler.
I have a friend (who writes C++ compilers -- yes, plural), who would take offense to your first sentence. A compiler whose object code is C source code is every bit as much a compiler as any other. The essence of a compiler is that it understands that syntax of the language, and generates new code based on that. A pre-processor has no knowledge of the language and merely reformats its input.
Remember that the C Compilers which would compile the output of those C++ compilers, would themselves output ASM code would would then be run through an assembler.
I tend to put C / C++ in my questions.
Typically I am looking for something that I can use in my c++ application.
If the code is in C or in C++ then I can use it, so I would rather not just limit the possible answers to one or the other.
Not only these two languages are different, but also the approaches are different. C++ is an OO language, while C is procedural language.
Do I have to mention templates?
Also, there are differences in C and C++ standards. If something is good in C, doesn't have to compile in C++