changing to C code
in [General Programming]
|
Prev: The project BIEW was renamed into BEYE
Next: berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung für selbständige, volkswohlbund berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung, versicherer, versicherung vergleich, gesundheitsfragen versicherung,
From: Bill Cunningham on 27 Feb 2010 13:40 "osmium" <r124c4u102(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:7uq3h3F3n8U1(a)mid.individual.net... > I think for the amount of energy expended by you, your time would be > better spent learning C++, rather than learning to convert to another > language. There are whole books on the subject of learning C++, AFAIK not > a single book on how ro convert C++ to C. Isn't that a good enoguh reason > by itself? I have the "C++ Primer" and kandr2. C++ has too much overhead IMO. There is nothing you could not do in C with a little effort that you can't do in C++. iostream alone carries enough overhead it makes my binaries huge. C is much smaller. If I was going to OOP, i'd probably pick Java. Bill
From: Bill Cunningham on 27 Feb 2010 13:43 "Alf P. Steinbach" <alfps(a)start.no> wrote in message news:hm6pmi$k00$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > What exactly do you mean? > > Maybe I remember wrong but as I recall RIFF is a kind of generic format, > where AVI is one common implementation. > > And if that's right then it doesn't make sense to convert AVI to RIFF, > since then it is already RIFF? AVI is a wrpper as I understand it. A RIFF file with a little more added by a joint effort of MS and IBM. The standards I've found now are written in C. So I'm one step ahead now. Bill
From: Michael Tsang on 4 Mar 2010 21:16 Bill Cunningham wrote: > > "osmium" <r124c4u102(a)comcast.net> wrote in message > news:7uq3h3F3n8U1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> I think for the amount of energy expended by you, your time would be >> better spent learning C++, rather than learning to convert to another >> language. There are whole books on the subject of learning C++, AFAIK not >> a single book on how ro convert C++ to C. Isn't that a good enoguh >> reason by itself? > > I have the "C++ Primer" and kandr2. C++ has too much overhead IMO. > There > is nothing you could not do in C with a little effort that you can't do in > C++. iostream alone carries enough overhead it makes my binaries huge. C > is much smaller. If I was going to OOP, i'd probably pick Java. > > Bill You can use OOP in C++ but at the same time stay out of iostream and use C library to keep your overhead small. (BTW, C++ code generally runs as the same performance of C code because they are both compiled into machine code.)
From: Richard Heathfield on 5 Mar 2010 03:00
Michael Tsang wrote: <snip> > (BTW, C++ code generally runs as the > same performance of C code because they are both compiled into machine > code.) Michael - congratulations! You are now front-runner in the 2010 comp.programming handwave-to-content-ratio contest! -- Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk> Email: -http://www. +rjh@ "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line vacant - apply within |