Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Am I being too C++ like? |
| Date | 2012-01-18 18:50 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jf7lvf$dcs$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <31492b98-d71f-4a77-95f3-c150099f9b0d@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com> |
On 1/18/2012 16:53, nroberts wrote:
> I'm working on a C project and I come from C++ background. I used to
> work with C 10 years ago though when I was first learning various
> languages and used things like Xlib, Xt, etc...
>
> I keep getting told that what I write is more C++ like. I find it odd
> because I'm actually using C keywords I rarely if ever use in C++ like
> union. But two main examples come to mind:
>
If you're typing legitimate C, then perhaps they're merely thinking of
style.
> First, I use opaque types to encapsulate data so I can depend on the
> integrity of my structures. For example, when making a stack I had a
> header like so:
>
> struct stack;
> typedef struct stack Stack;
>
> Stack* createList();
> void* popFront(Stack*);
> void pushBack(Stack*);
>
> etc...
>
Some notes about the above...
You've got an interesting mix of styles with your 'struct' tag and
'typedef' type. In C code that I've seen, it's more common to have:
struct stack;
typedef struct stack stack;
Or:
struct stack;
typedef struct stack stack_t;
In my own current, personal preference (which is not reflective of any C
community that I'm aware of), when I do not wish anyone to use the
'struct' keyword, I type something like:
struct s_stack_;
typedef struct s_stack_ s_stack;
/* ... */
struct s_stack_ {
...
};
/* We'll never see 's_stack_' again */
Or if people might or might not care to use the 'struct' keyword is:
struct stack;
typedef struct stack s_stack;
/* ... */
struct stack {
...
};
/* ... */
/* People can do */
struct stack foo;
/* Or they can do */
s_stack bar;
You're using the so-called "Pascal Case" for the 'typedef' type. This
might not be un-C-like, but I've seen more C++ code with this style than
I have seen C code with it.
You're using the so-called "Camel Case" for the functions' identifiers.
This might not be un-C-like, but I've seen more C++ code with this
style than I have seen C code with it.
"When In Rome..." I think it's good to follow any established style
guidelines that might exist for a project. If it's completely up to
you, please just be consistent. :)
If you don't specifically require an empty parameter list, please use
'void' inside your function declarations for functions having no parameters.
Stack * create_list(void);
> Another example is when I'm parsing an unknown string into one of
> several possibilities:
>
> typedef struct base
> {
> int type;
> // shared data among all valid inputs
> } Base;
>
Call me old-fashioned, but '//' comments always strike me as C++-like,
though they've been in Standard C since C99. They're extremely common
and people report them to be quite handy.
> typedef struct variant_a
> {
> Base base;
> // particular data members
> } VariantA;
>
Something about 'xxx_yyy_zzz' strikes me as C-like and something about
'XxxYyyZzz' strikes me as C++-like. The cause for this association
probably amounts to little more than the introductory books' examples
for these languages, when I first read them. It's a pretty trivial
association.
> ... more variants...
>
> typedef union blob
> {
> int type;
> Base base;
> VariantA a;
> ...etc...
> } Blob;
>
> Blob * parse(char const*);
>
> I've seen both of these used a lot in various C projects, but has it
> gone out of style or something? I suppose it's kind of OOesque, but
> I've always thought of that as one paradigm for use in any
> language...not something unique to any particular one. Is that an
> unpopular conception? If I were to do something similar in C++ it
> would look absolutely nothing like the above...why do people think
> it's C++ like? Are they full of it or am I? Both? Neither?
"Are they...?" They are. If you want to strive for "C-like," you could
study all of the code examples in a C Standard and try to pick out
patterns. Then again, that might just be reflective of those authors'
preferences! ;)
- Shao Miller
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Am I being too C++ like? nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2012-01-18 13:53 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-01-18 18:50 -0500
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2012-01-19 04:13 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-01-19 09:09 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2012-01-18 21:42 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-19 12:30 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-01-19 15:17 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-19 18:44 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-01-20 13:44 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-01-20 09:08 -0500
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-01-20 07:58 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-20 11:25 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kleuske <kleuske@nowhere.net> - 2012-01-20 20:17 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-21 09:23 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kleuske <kleuske@nowhere.net> - 2012-01-20 22:00 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-01-20 16:28 -0600
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-21 11:43 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-01-20 18:02 -0500
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-20 16:12 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-21 00:13 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? William Ahern <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2012-01-20 17:37 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-20 22:25 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-01-21 16:07 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Bill Reid <hormelfree@gmail.com> - 2012-01-23 17:26 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-01-21 18:00 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-01-21 21:25 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-02-11 23:46 +0200
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-02-11 22:56 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-02-22 02:34 +0200
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-01-21 22:42 +0100
Re: Am I being too C++ like? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-01-21 21:22 -0500
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-01-22 14:56 +0100
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 10:29 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kleuske <kleuske@nowhere.net> - 2012-01-21 11:36 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-22 12:13 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kleuske <kleuske@nowhere.net> - 2012-01-22 12:39 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-23 23:45 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kleuske <kleuske@nowhere.net> - 2012-01-24 16:54 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 04:43 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-01-22 15:29 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-21 11:58 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2012-01-21 21:32 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-01-19 04:23 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-19 14:39 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 05:14 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-23 23:42 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-01-19 14:51 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-01-19 23:04 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-20 16:03 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-01-20 06:01 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-21 08:03 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-01-21 12:31 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-22 10:18 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2012-01-20 05:22 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Marco <prenom_nomus@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-21 07:29 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-24 12:13 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-31 14:32 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-31 15:32 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-31 19:46 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-01-31 23:54 -0500
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-31 22:24 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-31 23:28 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-01 11:23 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-01 15:01 -0600
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-02-01 14:09 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-01 14:44 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 17:36 -0500
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-08 12:45 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-08 21:41 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-09 17:42 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-09 08:12 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-09 12:01 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-08 14:19 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-09 13:32 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-09 04:18 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2012-03-09 13:04 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-10 01:02 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2012-03-10 07:59 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-10 21:17 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-10 02:39 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-09 13:51 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-10 02:54 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-10 12:27 +1300
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 07:41 +0000
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-01 11:24 -0800
Re: Am I being too C++ like? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-02-01 21:55 +0000
csiph-web