why a little subset of C++ is the best

[asetof...@gmail.com]

why a little subset of C++ (sure without the massive use of exception handle, and using only the easier to understand and write, part of the language) is the best language?
Because allow freedom
Because allow strict type check
and the hack that type sys too
so one can to store in a matrix type one array and viceversa
Because one can debug and arrive to assembly instruction of CPU and memory of address N

It ha to need only a little bells advise the programmer possible error.
And has to be easy not complex (I think not understand at full the code of other but understand my subset of C++)
Thank You for C++ C and Assembly language.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

Could not agree more.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Mr Flibble]

On 02/04/2018 10:16, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Could not agree more.

Could not agree less.

/Flibble

--
"Suppose it’s all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are
confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What
will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?"
"I’d say, bone cancer in children? What’s that about?" Fry replied.
"How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery
that is not our fault. It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil."
"Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates
a world that is so full of injustice and pain. That’s what I would say."

[bitrex]

On 04/02/2018 07:39 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On 02/04/2018 10:16, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> Could not agree more.
>
> Could not agree less.
>
> /Flibble
>

"C++" where it's just like a bunch of straight C code organized into
methods inside classes dispatched by the God Object is fuckin' trash

[Paavo Helde]

On 2.04.2018 9:44, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
> why a little subset of C++ (sure without the massive use of exception handle, and using only the easier to understand and write, part of the language) is the best language?

In my little subset of C++ there are RAII, exceptions and templates.
There are no C-style arrays, no C-style raw pointers and no C-style
strings. This makes it both easier to learn and safer to use.

There is no point to have just C with a bit stricter type check if one
can have a much powerful language without losing anything C can do.

[Melzzzzz]

On 2018-04-02, Paavo Helde <myfir...@osa.pri.ee> wrote:
> On 2.04.2018 9:44, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
>> why a little subset of C++ (sure without the massive use of exception handle, and using only the easier to understand and write, part of the language) is the best language?
>
> In my little subset of C++ there are RAII, exceptions and templates.
> There are no C-style arrays, no C-style raw pointers and no C-style
> strings. This makes it both easier to learn and safer to use.

You are leaving in heaven then...

--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...

[Paavo Helde]

To be honest, this is an ideal I would like to achieve. In real life I
still need to resort to raw pointers when the profiler tells me so. And
of course C++ still provides many other possibilities to shoot my legs off.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 8:20:42 AM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
> On 04/02/2018 07:39 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On 02/04/2018 10:16, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> >> Could not agree more.
> >
> > Could not agree less.
> >
> > /Flibble
> >
>
> "C++" where it's just like a bunch of straight C code organized into

Boo for foul language.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 11:29:04 AM UTC-5, Paavo Helde wrote:
> On 2.04.2018 9:44, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:
> > why a little subset of C++ (sure without the massive use of exception handle, and using only the easier to understand and write, part of the language) is the best language?
>
> In my little subset of C++ there are RAII, exceptions and templates.
> There are no C-style arrays, no C-style raw pointers

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38780596/how-to-handle-constructors-that-must-acquire-multiple-resources-in-an-exception

I use what he describes there and have some code like this:
explicit BufferCompressed (int sz):BufferCompressed(sz,0){
compress=new ::qlz_state_compress();
compBuf=new char[compSize];
decomp=new ::qlz_state_decompress();
}



> and no C-style
> strings.

I use std::string, but don't abandon C-style strings completely.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net

[Scott Lurndal]

Boo to the asshole language cop.

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Mon, 2018-04-02, Paavo Helde wrote:
> On 2.04.2018 9:44, asetof...@gmail.com wrote:

>> why a little subset of C++ (sure without the massive use of
>> exception handle, and using only the easier to understand and
>> write, part of the language) is the best language?
>
> In my little subset of C++ there are RAII, exceptions and templates.
> There are no C-style arrays, no C-style raw pointers and no C-style
> strings. This makes it both easier to learn and safer to use.

Right. But there are also plenty of pure C++ features there's no need
to use in a typical program. It's worth pointing out, since the
anti-C++ people like to think (or pretend) you need to understand and
use all of the language all the time.

> There is no point to have just C with a bit stricter type check if one
> can have a much powerful language without losing anything C can do.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

[Rosario19]

On Mon, 02 Apr 2018 19:28:47 +0300, Paavo Helde wrote:

>On 2.04.2018 9:44, wrote:
>> why a little subset of C++ (sure without the massive use of exception handle,
>>and using only the easier to understand and write,
>>part of the language) is the best language?
>
>In my little subset of C++ there are RAII,

>exceptions

here we are not agree

>and templates.

>There are no C-style arrays, no C-style raw pointers and no C-style
>strings.

here not agree too
they are there with asm code too

>This makes it both easier to learn and safer to use.

easy and good to lern a pet language without to see the machine...
that pet languages with
the derive that make complex assembly language and cpu operation can
not be good; the result could be code not debuggable at level of cpu

>There is no point to have just C with a bit stricter type check if one
>can have a much powerful language without losing anything C can do.

RAII automatize all allocation deallocation of object it seems good
possible with something to say when memory is end or something is
wrong in the construction of objs

[bitrex]

It's tucking frash!!

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Focus pocus: https://github.com/Ebenezer-group/onwards