A89: Re: Re: tigcc - some REAL routines this time

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

A89: Re: Re: tigcc - some REAL routines this time


given the nature of comp.lang.c, they were most likely being kinda
sarcastic. although a good programmer from other languages could pick up C
quite easily from the book.

--kaus

----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Noveck <noveck@pluto.njcc.com>
To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2000 7:46 PM
Subject: A89: Re: tigcc - some REAL routines this time


>
> > I too have read this famed book and disagree with you.  It is not an
> > introduction for programming C, it is an introduction to _implementing_
C.
> > A good read for programmers as well, but its main purpose, and that of
its
> > forerunner, (1st edition) was to explain what C was supposed to do, and
> how
> > it should be done.
>
> Yes, that's true - but everytime I see someone asking how to learn see on
> comp.lang.c, they always recommend K&R2 - I don't really find that much of
a
> good guide for beginners; you really need to understand what algorithms
> they're using.  Understanding the section with their hash function gave me
a
> really hard time for a while, even though I found the rest of the book
easy,
> solely because I've never seen such an implementation before (but I like
> it).
>
> Then again, that group as a whole is one of the most arrogant I've seen on
> usenet - someone makes a mistake in their code and asks for a correction
and
> they get flamed.  Ask a question without any code and they all think it's
> homework.  Ask about C++ or a specific implementation, and rather than
> politely recommending you go to another group they flame you for not
> focusing solely on ANSI C.
>
> Actually, let me pose a question:  Is C a subset of C++?  In comp.lang.c
> they're always very quick to insist that it is NOT, because not all C
> compiles under C++.  On the other hand, I was in a bookstore yesterday and
> looked up Bjorn Stroustroup's _The C++ Programming Language, 3rd Edition_
> where he states that it is.  Now I'm confused =)
>
>     -Scott
>
> (54% of WinLinux 2000 downloaded - call me a lamer, but I want to fool
with
> it a bit before I start fooling with my partitions.  And downloading 142
MB
> over a 26.4 kbps modem is NOT fun - estimated 15+ hours total)
>
>
References: