Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #20644

Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison

From Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison
References <jojghh$91l$1@speranza.aioe.org> <0.81abe602485ae4e38c44.20120511203101BST.87boluwm4q.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <jojrg3$66s$2@speranza.aioe.org> <a15br0F58bU1@mid.individual.net>
Date 2012-05-12 07:18 +0100
Message-ID <87ehqpj51g.fsf@gmail.com> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> writes:

> On 05/12/12 08:06 AM, jacob navia wrote:
>> Le 11/05/12 21:31, Ben Bacarisse a écrit :
>>> I am not sure what you are really asking.
>>
>> Just trying to discuss the two approaches. I am sure
>> C++ has more "syntactic sugar" than C, but the
>> two approaches lead to similar code.
>
> Not really.  As Ben demonstrated, the "syntactic sugar" leads to much
> more concise and less error prone code.  In this case, 2 lines rather
> than 18!

Jacob's code contains an explicit cast of a void* to an int*, meaning
the programmer has to track the data types and then tell the compiler
what they are, rather than have the compiler track and check the types.

He doesn't seem to believe this to be a drawback.

Describing the C++ as "less error prone" would be something of an
understatement.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 18:59 +0200
  Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> - 2012-05-11 17:54 +0000
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 19:59 +0200
  Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-11 20:31 +0100
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 21:56 +0200
      Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-11 21:02 +0100
        Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 22:12 +0200
          Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-11 21:18 +0100
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 22:01 +0200
      Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-11 21:08 +0100
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 22:04 +0200
      Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-11 21:11 +0100
        Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 22:15 +0200
          Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison cartec69@gmail.com - 2012-05-11 13:17 -0700
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 22:06 +0200
      Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-12 08:41 +1200
        Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-05-12 07:18 +0100
          Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-12 09:48 +0200
            Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-12 20:09 +1200
              Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-12 10:30 +0200
                Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-12 21:23 +1200
                Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-12 11:39 +0200
                Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-12 23:02 +1200
                Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-12 13:14 +0100
                Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-12 14:35 +0200
            Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-05-13 10:59 +0200
  Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-11 23:36 +0100
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-12 00:25 +0100
      Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-12 01:58 +0100
        Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 19:30 -0700
    Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-12 09:49 +0200
  Re: CCL vs STL: a comparison Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-12 18:31 +0200

csiph-web