migration from perl

migration from perl

[Mat Harris]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 368 bytes --]

hi, i am a 'fairly' competant perl programmer but I believe that as most
of my work is with redhat, i should know that language it is built with.

can anyone point me in the right directions? what is the C equivalent to
perl.org? Should I learn C or C++?

thanks

-- 
Mat Harris			OpenGPG Public Key ID: CC14DD34
mat.harris@genestate.com	www.genestate.com	

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: migration from perl

[Axel Siebenwirth]

Hi Mat!

On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Mat Harris wrote:

Look at http://gcc.gnu.org and learn C++, I'd say. Because if you know C++
you also know plain C. And object-oriented programming is always a good 
thing nowadays.

Regards
Axel

> hi, i am a 'fairly' competant perl programmer but I believe that as most
> of my work is with redhat, i should know that language it is built with.
> 
> can anyone point me in the right directions? what is the C equivalent to
> perl.org? Should I learn C or C++?

Re: migration from perl

[Mat Harris]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 757 bytes --]

so am i right in thinking gcc is the same as C++?

On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 05:29:39 +0200, Axel Siebenwirth wrote:
> Hi Mat!
> 
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Mat Harris wrote:
> 
> Look at http://gcc.gnu.org and learn C++, I'd say. Because if you know C++
> you also know plain C. And object-oriented programming is always a good 
> thing nowadays.
> 
> Regards
> Axel
> 
> > hi, i am a 'fairly' competant perl programmer but I believe that as most
> > of my work is with redhat, i should know that language it is built with.
> > 
> > can anyone point me in the right directions? what is the C equivalent to
> > perl.org? Should I learn C or C++?

-- 
Mat Harris			OpenGPG Public Key ID: CC14DD34
mat.harris@genestate.com	www.genestate.com	

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: migration from perl

[Axel Siebenwirth]

Hi Mat!

Well gcc is the GNU C compiler. And g++ is the GNU C++ compiler.

Regards,
Axel


On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Mat Harris wrote:

> so am i right in thinking that gcc is the same as C++?
> 
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 05:29:39 +0200, Axel Siebenwirth wrote:
> > Hi Mat!
> > 
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Mat Harris wrote:
> > 
> > Look at http://gcc.gnu.org and learn C++, I'd say. Because if you know C++
> > you also know plain C. And object-oriented programming is always a good 
> > thing nowadays.

Re: migration from perl

[Glynn Clements]

Mat Harris wrote:

> so am i right in thinking gcc is the same as C++?

gcc supports C, C++ and Objective-C. Some distributions split it into
multiple packages, where the core package supports C, with C++ and
Objective-C as add-ons.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn.clements@virgin.net>

Re: migration from perl

[Glynn Clements]

Mat Harris wrote:

> can anyone point me in the right directions? what is the C equivalent to
> perl.org?

There isn't one.

> Should I learn C or C++?

I recommend learning C first. C++ is based upon C, so most of the
effort spent on learning C will still be relevant if you decide to use
C++.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn.clements@virgin.net>

Re: migration from perl

[<Iliyan Malchev>]

On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Glynn Clements wrote:

> > Should I learn C or C++?
> 
> I recommend learning C first. C++ is based upon C, so most of the
> effort spent on learning C will still be relevant if you decide to use
> C++.

I must disagree with this statement.  Bjarne Stroustrup in his book "The
Design and Evolution of C++" has a section dedicated to questions of that
nature, and his answer to "Should I learn C first, and then C++?" is that you
should not learn C if you want to learn C++ eventually.  Start with C++ from
scratch.  Yes, while C++ is superset of C, you should not think of it this
way.  C++ lets you program around a different paradigm, and you should start
with that.

Regards
Ilian Maltchev


"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
     --Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of
       science, 1949

-------------------------------------------------
Ilian Maltchev                                   
-------------------------------------------------
email: ibm@asu.edu
       ilian_maltchev@inter-tel.com
-------------------------------------------------

Re: migration from perl

[+Rudymartin]

i agree

if u want a good tutorial about C++ I suggest to pay a visit at this site: 
http://www.bruceeckel.com

you can d/l some pdf files about C++ programming


On Thursday 15 August 2002 07:32 pm,  wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Glynn Clements wrote:
> > > Should I learn C or C++?
> >
> > I recommend learning C first. C++ is based upon C, so most of the
> > effort spent on learning C will still be relevant if you decide to use
> > C++.
>
> I must disagree with this statement.  Bjarne Stroustrup in his book "The
> Design and Evolution of C++" has a section dedicated to questions of that
> nature, and his answer to "Should I learn C first, and then C++?" is that
> you should not learn C if you want to learn C++ eventually.  Start with C++
> from scratch.  Yes, while C++ is superset of C, you should not think of it
> this way.  C++ lets you program around a different paradigm, and you should
> start with that.
>
> Regards
> Ilian Maltchev
>
>
> "Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
>      --Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of
>        science, 1949
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Ilian Maltchev
> -------------------------------------------------
> email: ibm@asu.edu
>        ilian_maltchev@inter-tel.com
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-c-programming" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: migration from perl

[Glynn Clements]

"<Iliyan Malchev>" <ibm@asu.edu> wrote:

> > > Should I learn C or C++?
> > 
> > I recommend learning C first. C++ is based upon C, so most of the
> > effort spent on learning C will still be relevant if you decide to use
> > C++.
> 
> I must disagree with this statement.  Bjarne Stroustrup in his book "The
> Design and Evolution of C++" has a section dedicated to questions of that
> nature, and his answer to "Should I learn C first, and then C++?" is that you
> should not learn C if you want to learn C++ eventually.  Start with C++ from
> scratch.  Yes, while C++ is superset of C, you should not think of it this
> way.  C++ lets you program around a different paradigm, and you should start
> with that.

1. The original question seemed to imply that the poster was
interested in understanding the software which comprises the OS
distribution. The vast majority of that is in C, and all of the
standard libraries use a C API.

2. While C++ isn't strictly a superset of C, it's close. A thorough
understanding of C++ inevitably incorporates a thorough understanding
of C.

3. For someone who is coming from a background of using high-level
languages (the poster mentions Perl), many of the low-level aspects
(e.g. memory allocation, pointers) are likely to be new. It will be
easier to learn these in the context of a restricted subset of C++,
i.e. in C.

4. If you aren't interested in any of the low level aspects, then
there are better languages than C++. IMHO, about the only things that
C++ has in its favour are its compatibility with C, and it's ability
to exercise the same degree of low-level control as C. If you don't
need that, you may as well use a high-level OO language like Java or
O'Caml.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn.clements@virgin.net>

RE: migration from perl

[Earl R. Lapus]

I disagree...
Bjarne said that because that is how he wanted C++ to be...
something that's suppose to be a "different new language"
But basing on my experiences in school, those who knew C
learned C++ much faster than those who have no background in C.
So study C first.


-----Original Message-----
From: linux-c-programming-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-c-programming-owner@vger.kernel.org]On Behalf Of <Iliyan
Malchev>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 3:32 PM
To: Glynn Clements
Cc: Mat Harris; linux-c-programming@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: migration from perl




On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Glynn Clements wrote:

> > Should I learn C or C++?
>
> I recommend learning C first. C++ is based upon C, so most of the
> effort spent on learning C will still be relevant if you decide to use
> C++.

I must disagree with this statement.  Bjarne Stroustrup in his book "The
Design and Evolution of C++" has a section dedicated to questions of that
nature, and his answer to "Should I learn C first, and then C++?" is that
you
should not learn C if you want to learn C++ eventually.  Start with C++ from
scratch.  Yes, while C++ is superset of C, you should not think of it this
way.  C++ lets you program around a different paradigm, and you should start
with that.

Regards
Ilian Maltchev


"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
     --Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of
       science, 1949

-------------------------------------------------
Ilian Maltchev
-------------------------------------------------
email: ibm@asu.edu
       ilian_maltchev@inter-tel.com
-------------------------------------------------

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-c-programming" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html