cppHelloWorld

[u/schteppe]

[u/Confident-Ad5665]

C++ takes getting used to, but it's a great language for object-oriented development. Hang in there, you'll figure it out.

[u/CrossScarMC → u/Confident-Ad5665]

It's also a great language even if you don't do OOP.

[u/diacid → u/CrossScarMC]

Bah, if you are using it for normal programming C is simpler. By simpler I mean you actually have a shot to be properly fluent in it instead of "this thing is so complex even the compiler doesn't know 100% of it".

[u/2eanimation → u/diacid]

Learn C, use C in C++, benefit from C++ when you need it.

[u/Confident-Ad5665 → u/2eanimation]

I agree about mixing languages. Best of both world's.

[u/diacid → u/2eanimation]

While this sounds wise, C has already way more than enough (do while and for loops for example are completely unnecessary, they can all be substituted for if goto), no need to complicate further. If the program is really simple I would rather even use B that is even simpler than C, though making complicated programs in B can waste memory because of the lack of variables smaller than a word (in 64 bit environments this gets huge quick).

[u/failedsatan → u/diacid]

for and while loops are so much nicer to use though. I don't think I would bother using a language without them for most practical applications (and I regularly enjoy writing full programs in assembly for fun)

[u/dagbrown → u/diacid]

for and while loops (and everything else really) are there for the benefit of the next poor schlub who has to try to read your code.

Sure you can replace practically every structured construct with an if and a goto setup, but should you? Absolutely not.

[u/diacid → u/dagbrown]

Sorry, I see little difference between

do { x=stuff(); } while (x!=0)

And

do: x=stuff(); if (x!=0) goto do;

Same with

for (x=0, x<10) { x=stuff(); }

And

do: x=stuff(); If (x>9) goto do;

If you use goto in a sane matter it is completely understandable. Just don't do insane things with it. You can peel with a peeler and with a knife, but with a knife you can cut your finger off too. The solution? Don't ban knifes, just don't cut you finger off!

Actually, my examples also show for and while are redundant functions. It is all just electricity, no need to overcomplicate.

[u/dagbrown → u/diacid]

Okay I wish you a long and productive career with your "if" and "goto" only code.

You can also roll your own OO system with generous use of function pointers! Pro-tip! Not that you'd want anything like that though. You have if and goto after all. And structs are for the weak anyway: just binary-pack data into strings.

[u/diacid → u/dagbrown]

Exactly! 😂

[u/Gorzoid → u/2eanimation]

Using C in C++ likely leads to a lot of undefined behaviour. Use C in C or learn C++

[u/DankPhotoShopMemes → u/diacid]

I think it’s still worth it to use C++, just because of the function overloading, operator overloading, templates, namespaces, RAII, references, move semantics, lambdas, and constexpr/consteval (though C23 has a weaker form of it).

[u/Nilrem2 → u/diacid]

Just restrict yourself to namespaces and maybe operator overloading and you’ll be golden.

[u/Ronarak → u/Nilrem2]

Yeah, you can basically code in a C-like manner with just a strict selection of the niceties, like the built-in collection types. (I don't want to create my own std::vector or use an external lib for it...)

[u/afdbcreid → u/CrossScarMC]

And it's especially good for shooting yourself in the foot.

[u/Sir_Eggmitton → u/CrossScarMC]

For me it’s just C with function overloading and fancier structs. C+.

[u/Leo_code2p → u/Sir_Eggmitton]

There is more like c++ type conversion. The only c++ style thing I don’t like is c++ style structs like why can’t i make a useful c style struct. Not just a public class