Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #18846
| From | "tim....." <tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.arch.embedded |
| Subject | Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ |
| Date | 2014-10-20 11:57 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <cak845Fhs0dU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <caf18hF6lueU1@mid.individual.net> <7x4mv1tdyv.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <cahbdfFp8kcU1@mid.individual.net> <7xoat7hape.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <Y831w.377569$wn1.80788@fx18.am4> |
"Tom Gardner" <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:Y831w.377569$wn1.80788@fx18.am4... > On 20/10/14 01:00, Paul Rubin wrote: >> Well yeah, you get tested, standardized implementations of a bunch of >> datatypes that occur over and over in real world programs. Who wants to >> write a new function, debug it, maintain it, make others maintain it, >> figure out and maintain the implementations of such functions written by >> others, stop groaning after finding there are dozens of implementations >> of essentially the same function in any large codebase, etc. Imagine >> the C library didn't standardize printf, so everyone wrote their own >> function for printing numbers in decimal. Yeah you could, but it gets >> in your way at more levels than you might expect. > > I'm out of date. Does C now have a standard "string" that everybody uses? > char * tim
Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
reasons for preferring C over C++ Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2014-10-15 19:21 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-15 10:36 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2014-10-15 19:48 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-15 21:25 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2014-10-15 23:28 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-15 23:40 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-15 10:58 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-15 21:03 +0300
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-15 11:11 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2014-10-15 20:26 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2014-10-15 20:44 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2014-10-15 23:30 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2014-10-16 18:19 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2014-10-16 23:12 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2014-10-17 13:25 +0800
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2014-10-17 18:43 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ "tim....." <tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-10-18 12:29 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-18 11:44 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-18 22:25 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-18 15:42 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2014-10-19 11:03 +0300
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2014-10-19 17:46 -0500
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-19 16:28 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Nobody <nobody@nowhere.invalid> - 2014-10-20 02:47 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ "tim....." <tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-10-19 09:34 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-19 17:00 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-20 08:50 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ "tim....." <tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-10-20 11:57 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-20 12:11 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-20 22:36 +0300
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2014-10-21 00:36 +0000
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-20 08:52 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ "tim....." <tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-10-20 11:56 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2014-10-19 10:52 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-19 17:16 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-18 23:02 +0000
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ "tim....." <tims_new_home@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-10-19 09:45 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-10-15 22:12 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2014-10-15 23:35 +0200
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-10-15 19:10 -0700
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2014-10-16 10:34 +0300
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-10-16 10:10 +0100
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2014-10-16 01:06 -0500
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ Anders.Montonen@kapsi.spam.stop.fi.invalid - 2014-10-16 08:32 +0000
Re: reasons for preferring C over C++ David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-10-16 20:54 +0200
csiph-web