Can anyone recomend a good intoduction to C...

[Werner Schiendl]

Grant Edwards <grante at visi.com> wrote in message
news:o9up6.1291$y6.235469 at ruti.visi.com...
> In article <983967284.246700 at newsmaster-04.atnet.at>, Werner Schiendl
wrote:
>
> >> > That is of course a point, if you need to let the program
> >> > inspect you will try to keep it as simple as possible. But
> >> > given the same functionality, I think a C++ program will not be
> >> > more complex.
> >>
> >> The program will not be, the language is.  It's a hard-to-judge
> >> tradeoff.
> >
> >As to my knowledge, the application itself is inspected for
> >safety critical appliances. And you must not change anything
> >afterwards in the software or you need to re-inspect the
> >software.
> >
> >What use would it be to check the language?
>
> The point is that the more complex the language, the more
> difficult it is to inspect the application.  You can look at a
> few lines of C and have a pretty good chance at guessing what
> they do.  In C++ it's much harder to look at snippet of code
> and figure out what it's going to do.
>

At least if the design is bad.

Usually an object oriented program should be easier to read.
Just because the syntax does more closely resemble the way humans think.

(But I saw enough examples that demonstrated just the opposite...)

> --
> Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  Somewhere in
DOWNTOWN
>                                   at               BURBANK a prostitute is
>                                visi.com            OVERCOOKING a LAMB
CHOP!!