next »

[fluffrabbit]

If you ever thing using any of the strxxx functions or char*s as strings, you've gone too far.

Only if you plan on switching to C++. char* is a C string, and it seems to work about as well as this new-fangled string_view stuff in C++17. Why not learn the basics of a language that you have set out to learn?

[oahda]

Even if one goes full-fledged modern C++ one will probably have to interface with C libraries or older-style C++ ones so it's always good to know how those things work too.

[qMopey]

Take a look at C, but don't go too deep. If you ever thing using any of the strxxx functions or char*s as strings, you've gone too far.

This is horrible advice 

[InfiniteStateMachine]

I learned c++ first. It's hard to tell what changes when I was first learning would have benefit me most but I think I can say with some level of confidence that you should learn to program with c++ as a starting language.

Do you already know how to program or is this your first programming language?

OOPS I meant to say you should NOT choose c++ as your first programming language :X

Edited/Fixed my original post. My bad.

[kason.xiv]

...

OOPS I meant to say you should NOT choose c++ as your first programming language :X

Edited/Fixed my original post. My bad.

You really had me befuddled there for a second

[Daid]

Take a look at C, but don't go too deep. If you ever thing using any of the strxxx functions or char*s as strings, you've gone too far.

This is horrible advice 

Maybe the advice comes from the fact that working with strings in C is a pain the the butt compared to using std::string. It might be a tad less efficient, but it's much less memory error prone.

I stopped counting the cases of "Person A made a 'clever' C string processing routine, Person B changed the functionality and introduced some kind of corruption because he wasn't as clever as person A. And then Person C runs into that actual bug."

Ofcourse, this is made worse with the C string functions losing their "const correctness", like:

Code:

char * strchr ( const char *, int );

So:

Code:

strchr("ABC", 'B')[0] = 'X';
printf("ABC");

Will:

• Not compile in C++, but compiles fine in C.
• Might crash, print "ABC" or print "AXC", depending on your compiler and target platform.

[Schrompf]

Maybe the advice comes from the fact that working with strings in C is a pain the the butt compared to using std::string. It might be a tad less efficient, but it's much less memory error prone.

I wanted to chime in that: due to small string optimization, std::string outperforms C-Strings for average tasks. The only nice thing you can do with C-Strings is to point to them, and std::string_view does that even better because it doesn't have to count every time you want to do something with its content.

On the topic: I don't think it's required to learn C before C++, but it certainly doesn't hurt. Maybe you get the basics of stack vs. heap more easily there, and you get a feel for what std::string, std::map and the like are doing under the hood.

[fluffrabbit]

I don't know why, but with C++ I amass technical debt a lot quicker. I like to keep things simple. The Cave Confectioner codebase is a nightmare.