Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 14th May 2009 15:39 UTC
Permalink for comment 364140
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-26
Indeed, it is. There is no reason not to take advantage of function and operator overloading, classes, templates, RAII, the STL, and even the fantastic Boost libraries. In fact, Stroustrup even suggests that the only reason to use C over C++ is when you're faced with the lack of a good C++ compiler.
Bad programmers are plentiful in every language. That is unavoidable. What I find disturbing is that universities, due mainly to retention and budget problems, have institutionalized the act of creating bad programmers.
It is a large and complex language. I'd say it takes at least a decade of experience with C++, working with it full time on a variety of different projects at different technical levels before you can call yourself a good C++ programmer. And of course, any good C++ programmer has copies of the Scott Meyers books and D&E on their bookshelf.
Edited 2009-05-18 22:29 UTC