| | |
| | |
Terms of Agreement:
By using this article, you agree to the following terms...
1) You may use
this article in your own programs (and may compile it into a program and distribute it in compiled format for languages that allow it) freely and with no charge.
2) You MAY NOT redistribute this article (for example to a web site) without written permission from the original author. Failure to do so is a violation of copyright laws.
3) You may link to this article from another website, but ONLY if it is not wrapped in a frame.
4) You will abide by any additional copyright restrictions which the author may have placed in the article or article's description. | | Should I learn C before C++? Isn't C better because it has less overhead?
These are very valid questions and ones that I believe should be answered prior to delving into the world of C/C++. I feel that the answers are "no, you should learn C++ first, then you should come to understand the fundamental differences C++ and its predocessor" and "no, C++ still retains the efficiency of C with improved and new features." Many people are apt to veiw C and C++ as two entirely different languages, whereas I prefer to see C++ as an improved version of C that can still utilize many of the features that are thought of as "C-style." Some C programmers will argue that C++ is too large with too much overhead. The fact is that there is indeed more overhead with classes as opposed to (C-style, data-only) structures. However, you should bear in mind that just because you are using C++ you don't need to make everything object-oriented. This is to say, if you feel the situation calls for a simple structure or enumeration, then by all means use them. There's nothing wrong with utilizing the less complex and more efficient C-style data types when data encapsulation isn't a major concern, but memory is. The point is, C++ is a better C with improved (completely overhauled , actually) data structures, memory allocation, and I/O features. You are much better off learning and using this improved methods first, and then go back and familiarize yourself with the way C handles these methods. C++ is a big, complex language, but I honestly don't feel that coming to learn C first will necessarily aid you. Learning C's (error-prone) I/O system and memory allocation instead of C++'s will only cause bad practice and style further down the road. However, you should at least understand C's methods in case you ever work with legacy code. You also can familiarize yourself with the data structure efficieny in C, so that you can incorproate that along with object-oriented data structures. I have to agree with some C++ critics that it can have a bit of overhead in some cases, but C++'s advanced features--like overloaded operators and multiple inheritance--are options, not requirements. This is the whole reason why C was chosen to be the base language, because of its efficiency, and C++ still has all of that efficieny with improved and more features.
| |
Other 2 submission(s) by this author
| | | | | Report Bad Submission | | | | | Your Vote! | |
See Voting Log | | | | Other User Comments | 6/28/2000 4:32:42 AM:Dustin Davis
Dude, dont post things like this on
PSC. But if you must know, i learned C
before C++ and C was easy to learn, C++
was hard, but knowing C made it alot
easier. I suggest doing as I did, learn
C basics, then learn C++.
| 6/28/2000 11:25:56 AM:Blake Madden
What's easier?
C:
CObject*
pObject =
(CObject*)malloc(sizeof(CObject));
or
C++:
CObject* pObject = new
CObject;
C:
printf("Integer %i
Float %f Pointer %p", IntVar, FloatVar,
PointerVar);
or C++:
cout <<
IntVar << " " << FloatVar << " " <<
PointerVar;
Yes, I'll be the first
to admit that classes are quite
overwhelming (pure virtual
destructors?, yikes!), but C++'s memory
allocation and I/O makes both learning
and usage of C/C++ so much easier. C++
(for the most part) handles a lot of
the dirty work for you.
| 6/30/2000 3:38:53 PM:Eli
This is nice, but really does not
belong to this site.
| 6/30/2000 3:52:46 PM:Blake Madden
This is a C++ site isn't it? Anyway,
this was the first question I had when
I first looked at C++, and this was the
same advice that I got from numerous
others when I asked. Therefore, I am
sharing that advice to others now. I
thought the reason people come here is
to find answers to his/her C/C++
questions.
| 7/14/2000 12:43:14 AM:aramas@ace-net.com.au
Hey, I got a copy of a friends old
MSVC4.1 compiler. I really want to
learn C (already great at VB) and I
have checked out a few tutorials and
books, but is there a better way to
lealrn? how did all you gusy learn C ?
| 8/4/2000 8:44:28 PM:Dan Corkery
Thanks Blake for advice on
| 8/4/2000 8:49:30 PM:Dan Corkery
...Don't know what happened there...my
message didn't appear! Anyway,...all I
said was that I found your advice good
and, being a "Newbie" to
programming(having never read a book
yet), I think sites such as this should
cater for both those who know and those
who don't!
As I said..it's a shame
they didn't teach this stuff to us when
I was in school!
| 8/8/2000 9:46:36 AM:andy
I dont how those guys can say this
article is irrelevant or not to post
it.. This is exactly what I was trying
to determine and the consensus from all
sources seems to be NOT to learn C
first, unfortuneatly I have yet to come
across a C whoa to go tutorial, most
assume C knowledge. Thanks Blake.
| 8/29/2000 2:50:47 PM:Mike
I have to agree with Andy, Dan and
Blake. This is exactly why I come to
PSC, to answer my questions. I'm a VB
programmer trying to learn C/C++, and
the first thing I thought of was,
| 8/29/2000 2:53:46 PM:mike
Dont know why that dropped out like
that, what I said was....
the first
thing I thought was HEY, PSC might have
some general answers on how best to
learn. This place is for coders of all
levels, not just for those who don't
know. Thanks Blake! I appreciate the
knowledge you have shared with us all.
| 9/14/2000 9:37:05 PM:AngelsMajestic
Just thought I'd add my 2 cents
worth.
I've been learning VB and now
want to
learn c/c++. Didn't even know
there was
a difference between the
two c's.
Call me dumbo, but I for
one
am sure glad this was posted. Now
I have
a somewhat better concept of
this c thing.
And I think I'll try the
++ one first.
Thanks for considering
us newbies..,
| 9/19/2000 10:46:02 AM:master control
I learned C++ by reading The C++
programming lanaguage by Bjarne
Stroustrup. This book starts the first
couple of chapters on basics (like
learning c with modifications) then
jumps into the objects and
polymorphism. If you know VB, you'll
pick this book up quick. Greatest book
ever. Oh yeah the author lead the
development of C++. This article is an
extremely important question.
| 10/20/2000 3:37:19 PM:Ben Jacobs
I disagree and think that you should
learn C first. C programs take less
time to compile, are smaller, and C is
easier to learn. If you want to learn
C the really easy way get Dan Gookin's
"C for Dummies Volume 1." It starts
out at an extremely basic and easy to
understand level and works up, still
explaining everything great.
| 10/23/2000 1:28:16 PM:Cheetah_Research
I just wanted to say thank you that it
has been helpful for us newcomers to
programming to wonder if C or C++ is
the area to start, I was told C first
before, but if you have an overall
structural knowledge of logic, C++ I
see now, should be no problem, thank
you for considering and helping us
confused newcomers in the field of
programming, especially us hard working
mothers, like me!
| 1/28/2001 10:42:52 PM:Rodolfo
Great post. Exactly what I was looking
for! I'm a VB programmer, and I was
wondering about: "what should I learn
first?"... Now I realize that the best
thing to do is to come from the highest
level language (such as VB) and then to
go to the lower ones, like C++, then C,
then Assembly...
Thanks!
| | | Add Your Feedback! | Note:Not only will your feedback be posted, but an email will be sent to the code's author in your name.
NOTICE: The author of this article has been kind enough to share it with you. If you have a criticism, please state it politely or it will be deleted.
For feedback not related to this particular article, please click here.
| |
|
