Re: Question about objects
On 2007-08-30 00:17, R2D2 wrote:
On 29 Aug 2007 at 20:37, J. J. Farrell wrote:
On Aug 29, 9:24 pm, R2D2 <r...@spamtrap.invalid> wrote:
I posted to comp.lang.c in case people could see a problem with the
underlying C code - please dont remove this crosspost. Thanks.
What on earth are you talking about? What do you mean by "underlying C
code"? No-one in comp.lang.c can usefully comment if your post is not
about C, and there was nothing even vaguely related to C in your post.
Do you understand what C++ is? It's the C language, with a few
extensions bolted on like objects and polymorphism. So in any
malfunctioning code, the problem might be the C base code, or the C++
extension parts. So it's perfectly suitable to ask in comp.lang.c as
well as comp.lang.c++.
Please don't top-post, see the FAQ, section 5, for more information
about how to format your replies.
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/how-to-post.html
His understanding of what C++ is is better than yours. While what you
said was true once upon a time this is no longer the case. When BS
created C++ it started out as an extension to the C language, but since
then both languages have evolved, and not always in the same direction.
The result of this evolution is that there are now lots of valid C++
code that is also valid C code, however there is an ever greater amount
of C++ code that is *not* valid C. Likewise there are now lots of valid
C code that is also valid C++, and also much valid C that is *not* valid
C++.
An it's not just the classes and templates, there is code that is both
valid C and valid C++ that does not have the exact same meaning, which
can cause a lot of problems.
More to the point, of the code you posted in the original message not a
single line would have compiles or been meaningful in C, but in C++
there was only one slight error (except for the problem your question
was about).
--
Erik Wikstr??m