Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25814

Re: Java vs C++

Path	csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Java vs C++
Date	Mon, 07 Feb 2011 07:37:26 -0500
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	22
Message-ID	<iiop28$8jj$1@news.eternal-september.org> (permalink)
References	<iijbfr$pb2$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <2011020510425674637-angrybaldguy@gmailcom> <iil0or$niu$2@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4e25e8@news.x-privat.org> <iinah1$2up$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4f45fc$0$23760$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <iio24q$g2f$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Injection-Date	Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:37:28 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info	mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="LtjcJP1H6uHOtkcPMh0bUA"; logging-data="8819"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19S7AM4lgBzEv2q0EktJ/CGDdADgVJ0nOA="
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12pre) Gecko/20101019 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.6pre
In-Reply-To	<iio24q$g2f$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>
Cancel-Lock	sha1:77WAWhmtEtKBQCupMkMoU458dUo=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:25814

Show key headers only | View raw

On 02/07/2011 01:06 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message<4d4f45fc$0$23760$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> And the C spec leaves a lot of things to implementations.
>
> Not too much that you can’t write portable code in it.

Writing portable code in C pretty much requires you to do hefty 
compatibility layers. Many projects use typedefs to get proper-sized int 
variables (you can't use stdint.h, as MSVC doesn't implement it, as of 
MSVC 9.0). Anything more complex than basic I/O requires the use of 
other, largely incompatible layers, for common things like 
multithreading, asynchronous I/O, network I/O, etc. Let's not even get 
into basic GUIs.

And even then, a careful reading of the C standard would reveal that it 
gives very few absolute requirements of stuff, so that I could make 
size_t be an 800-bit integer and still follow the standard, as well as 
probably breaking everyone's so-called "portable C" code.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Java vs C++ Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com> - 2011-02-05 10:42 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 09:22 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:57 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 16:06 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:56 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 16:06 +1300
      Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:17 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-02-08 19:46 -0400
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 12:23 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-07 07:37 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:08 -0500
      Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 19:06 +1300
  Re: Java vs C++ Helium Balloon <hb.3459s._jsf3k@goo.abvg> - 2011-02-06 19:55 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-07 13:29 +1300
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:47 -0500
    Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-06 20:38 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-02-06 09:34 -0400

csiph-web