Warning this is a purely biased view and opinion. I'm not ranting. I'm discussing.
I would like to point out some facts here
Quote:
2. C++ IS NOT a difficult language to learn, it is difficult to use, deploy and debug (maybe), and that only gets easier with time. In fact C++ has one of the most straight forward lexics especially when going into heavy OOP implementations.
I think it's false.
Easier language to learn are in my opinion the NON oop ones. OOP languages are more efficient for modularity purposes and reusability of code. I actually think that OOP, is very complicated to DEBUG, compared to Sequential languages. I admit Sequential languages code can get a whole lot more ugly than OOP code, but you can do the same in SEQUENTIAL way than in OOP.. Just with more code.
OOP languages requires an OOP way of thinking that is NOT natural to everyone. And also requires way more planning ahead.
While If I program for a task to do and have a very tight schedule I won't go the OOP way just in case I need to rewrite the same code. I'll write the sequential way, which is the natural way of implementing a task
( what I do first, second and so on ) divide the task to do in small infinitesimal tasks, validate, and then debug. That's the sequential way of doing things.
I need the same code again ? I keep my source code, CUT paste it and voilĂ*. Almost as quick as Link to an OBJ object of a oop library. Oh and I think OOP is overrated. It is useful for some tasks and very cumbersome for others. Just like Sequential way. Need to know exactly your needs for the task at hand.
This is also not true.. C++ is closer to real OOP object, but it's still just a patch over C to be a OOP oriented object.Quote:
5. OOP is present in physical world, and that is why I think C++ s strong OOP implementation is a better argument against VB's rather loose and amateur implementation (no multiple inheritance).
C++ has the capacity of being OOP but you can go around it, use C++ syntax and ANSI library and still go sequential non oop way. What I really think you want to say is Go learn an OOP language and not go learn c++ which is just a syntax.
While real OOP languages (smalltalk comes to mind) are closer to OOP implementation than C++.
I'm not mixing stuff. I asked him if he wanted to do WINDOWS ( as in window, button and all that stuff ) programming. If he does, I'm guessing he's programming for the WINDOWS XP platform. And if he does, he might as well go .NET if he wants to program with windows and buttons because it is way much easier.Quote:
4. People seem to misunderstand and mix a LANGUAGE and its IMPLEMENTATION. C++ is not microsofts compiler, or GNU or whatever else, it is simply a set of rules which make up a language of communication to a machine. SO basically, there should be not talking about "fast", "portable" etc. C++ compilers get better and faster, and also there exist implementations of C++ facilites which interpret C++ source code rather than compile and link it. So basically, one is left with a rather clean, hardware unobstructed understanding.
Or he can go to the rather slow sluggish java. But then he gets an implementation of OOP which is closer than C++ to real OOP specifications.
True, agree 100 %.Quote:
3. You DO NOT need to understand hardware workings in order to use C++, again despite what many perhaps think, because of their legacy knowledge about C which C++ derives from. C++ is fairly abstract, and you can get away without at least knowing what is flat memory adressing, interrupt requests etc. Just take a look at C++.NET (Managed C++), it is half step away from being a C#.
Example, I used a C program in OS/2 and in UNIX.. Worked on both, used only ANSI functions. Spawn and other trick I did worked wether I was on OS/2 or Unix.
But I must say that for me , an operating system is not Hardware related it is a software that let you use your computer.
Learning how to program is different from learning syntax.Quote:
1. Knowing C++ syntax paves way for knowledge of Java, JavaScript, ActionScript 2.0 (ECMAScript 1.4) and C# syntaxes and paradigms (classes, objects, inheritance, incapsulation, interfaces, referencing and more). Knowing VB does neither of the above, except being a "similarity dejavu".
I'm used to program in
REXX, COBOL, C, C++, VB, VB.NET, SQL
The syntax are really different... But it doesn't matter much since you know how to program and open a book to check the references to see what is the syntax for that language.
Yes vb is faster for application development under windows operating system.Quote:
The only reason I would recommend VB is rapid application development.
Does that make us bad people or bad programmer because we do that ?
No
You'd be surprised of how many application written in VB you might be using unless you're not even using windows.Quote:
If anything else, dont. How many professional VB applications I use ?
Some microsoft products are written in VB.
What's the point ? I mean, you wasted 3 years learning VB ? I mean it's not wasted. While you were programming VB you gained knowledge of the language limitations, it's strenghts. You also learned how to program and also how to work around language limitations. This is way more important than learning a syntax.Quote:
VB can only waste three year of their time if they later suddenly decide to start developing applications for NASA missions or scientific simulation.
