Newbie: The C / C++ Issue

Lucas Holt luke at
Wed Nov 12 18:36:22 PST 2003

On Nov 12, 2003, at 8:37 PM, Marty Leisner wrote:

> BTW -- I've been doing "object oriented" stuff in C for years --
> its harder, but its doable.  You have a much simpler language
> to deal with.
> First learn how to write good programs in C.
> Then see if C++ buys you anything extra.
> If it doesn't, you don't need C++.
> But I've seen far too much C++ that's just obscure C.
> Just my experience and opinion.
> marty

Am I missing something here?  When does C have OO capability?  Structs 
don't count.  What about inheritance and polymorphism?

To me a struct is like a VCR with no record button.  You can view the 
content, but you can't manipulate it with the struct.  If i want to do 
something to destroy the tape, I must apply a magnet from an outside 
source (much like a plain old function).  And classes provide security, 
much like the tab on the front of the tape.  The data is private if the 
tab is puched out.  (ok thats a bad analogy)

If C had OO features, then why do we have C++ and Objective C?

I would agree that you can write programs that do the same thing in all 
three languages above, but I don't think that OO is a waste of time.  
OO promotes code reuse.  That is the whole point.

Using C++ implies a state of mind.  You can write code like in C, but 
it defeats the purpose of using an OO language.

Lucas Holt
Luke at
________________________________________________________  (Jewel Fan Site) (Free blogging)

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and 
I'm not sure about the former."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list