C... Why not c++?
djake_at_excite.it
Date: 10/31/04
- Next message: meital: "Re: dynamic allocation"
- Previous message: Martin Ambuhl: "Re: dynamic allocation"
- Next in thread: hanzac_at_hotmail.com: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: hanzac_at_hotmail.com: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: john: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Neil Kurzman: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Erik de Castro Lopo: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Martin Ambuhl: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Malcolm: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Tim Prince: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Old Wolf: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 30 Oct 2004 17:30:49 -0700
Someone can exaplain me why use C instead C++? Until now i've never
found exaplanation for this.
Every project written in C on which i've worked could be written in
c++, and when in nowadays happen still to see C code i really don't
understand why the same things cannot be written in c++. Using c++
it's possble to reduce developing time achieving the same result.
Can you give me a valid reason for C?
- Next message: meital: "Re: dynamic allocation"
- Previous message: Martin Ambuhl: "Re: dynamic allocation"
- Next in thread: hanzac_at_hotmail.com: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: hanzac_at_hotmail.com: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: john: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Neil Kurzman: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Erik de Castro Lopo: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Martin Ambuhl: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Malcolm: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Tim Prince: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Reply: Old Wolf: "Re: C... Why not c++?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]