Around 05:06pm on Saturday, September 05, 2009 (UK time), Thomas Hruska scrawled:
> Steve Searle wrote: > > Around 05:58am on Saturday, September 05, 2009 (UK time), Thomas Hruska > > scrawled: > > > >> author (you should be learning C++ anyway, not C): > > > > Why shouldn't he learn C? It is still frequently used, and even if it > > wasn't this should not mean people shouldn't learn it. > > > > I do however agree that if you want to learn C++, there is no need to > > learn C first. > > > > Steve > > Because all new projects should be written in C++. You don't have to Say's who? There are many reasons for choosing what language a new project should be written in, there certainly isn't just a prescriptive rule. And he may not be expecting to always work on new projects anyway. Many programmers won't be working on new projects, but on maintaining old code. In adition, GNU standards prefer C to any other language [http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Source-Language.html#Source-Language] I have no problem with you giving reasons why in some/many circumstances writing a new project in C++ rather than C is preferable in your opinion. However to make a blanket statement like C++ should aways be learned instead of C, is as sensible as saying vi should always be learned/used instead of emacs (or vise-versa) or MS Windows should aways be used instead of GNU/Linux (or vise-versa). Steve -- (o< www.stevesearle.com //\ Powered by Fedora V_/_ No MS products were used in the creation of this message 17:09:22 up 8 days, 10:09, 0 users, load average: 0.19, 0.14, 0.04
