My Generation

Pages: 1... 3456
I know what a struct is in C. It's not really that much different than classes with the exception of no functions.
And inheritance, and operator overloading, and private/protected memebers, and struct names exist in a different namespace.
Fredbill - you are not getting it.

What about inheritance & access specifiers?

A C struct is a POD type (Plain Old Data) - a C++ struct is not necessarily.

You saying they are not, is like comparing a coffee plunger with a fully electronic coffee machine.
Well I wasn't thinking about that.

Private/Public variables/methods only exist because functions are in classes.

If they weren't I'd just be silly to have a private variable.
Why won't you just accept what others are telling you? Especially advice from people like Disch?

Talking about your generation ....
What? What are you trying to say? I am listening. When did I disagree with what Disch said?
Last edited on by Fredbill30
FredBill wrote:
What? What are you trying to say?


Executive Summary : Grow up.

Well, you are one of the youngest members on this forum, IMO you need to be more careful about what you say. Remember there are lots of people out there that are much older than you, and they have corresponding amounts of life experience and / or technical knowledge and industry experience.

Not only do you express naive pedagogic opinions about a range of things (not just programming), but you argue against those who present a more adult and / or technically correct view.

So, instead of making silly statements, consider what you have said before submitting it. Think about it from other people's point of view - keeping in mind the amount of experience they have. Also consider that there are thousands of people who look at this forum, and only a fraction who make replies. So you could think about it being almost like being on TV (or YouTube) - would you make an ass of yourself in front of so many people?

Better yet, how about enquiring, rather than telling. Try to learn from others, rather than expressing your often wrong view.

In my mind, it is always a good idea to a realistic and honest idea of where one stands in relation to others in terms of knowledge, experience & ability - whether it be one's hobby, sport, work or any other thing that one may be involved in. Be aware of this when helping others - Is what you have said technically correct?

Having said that, no one is perfect, so I admit that I have said the wrong thing on several occasions, and I might need to follow my own advice sometimes. I have sometimes given advice that was outside of my boundary of knowledge.

All this doesn't mean you can't have an opinion of your own - I am saying just be more careful how you express it. Making generalisations is a big source of getting off side with lot's of people.

In terms of sarcasm (this is for everyone), I like to think of this line from a Dire Straights song :

Dire Straights wrote:
When you point your finger because your plans fell through,
There are three more fingers pointing back at you,


Sometimes sarcasm is warranted though.

FredBill wrote:
When did I disagree with what Disch said?


Here :

FredBill wrote:
I know what a struct is in C. It's not really that much different than classes with the exception of no functions.


And chrisname, here :

FredBill wrote:
Not totally different. Just C++ structs have... well more.


And me, here :

FredBill wrote:
Private/Public variables/methods only exist because functions are in classes.

If they weren't I'd just be silly to have a private variable.


So that's 3 people you disagreed with.
Last edited on
Actually I see a point in the 3rd statement, that is if I have understood correctly. If there were no member functions in classes would there be any use for private variables? Missing something?
abhishekm71 wrote:
If there were no member functions in classes ...


That is a supposition and doesn't constitute an argument. Which is why Frebill's argument fails.

It is a bit like saying :

"Suppose that motor bikes didn't have engines - they would be more like bicycles"

Or this false argument :

Object 1 has features A, B, C, D, E . Object 2 has feature A. Suppose object 1 didn't have features B, C, D, E : then object 1 is the same as object 2, hence objects 1 & 2 are similar.
What are you even talking about Idea?

I was sure chris was being sarcastic on the thing on how they're totally different.
No he wasn't. They are totally different.

EDIT: maybe "totally different" is misleading. The definitely have similarities, but they also have many differences.
Last edited on
yeah ok now i understand TheIdeasMan what you were implying.
@Disch
You're right, "totally different" is an overstatement.
@chrisname
I don't think it is that much of an overstatement.

C structs only let you have members and not methods. You have to pass the struct as a parameter of a function to work with the data.
C++ structs and classes have members and methods. Then the differences between these are the things pointed out (inheritance and such). They have their own methods for manipulating data.

Feel you were just being honest.

They are different, but "totally" is still an overstatement because there are quite a few similarities. C++ classes are basically extended structs.
In the same sense that C++ is basically an extended C.
Well, it is.

[edit] 6,666 posts. Should I make a "chrisname2" now?
Last edited on
I'm not saying it's not. The two are fundamentally similar, but there are enough differences between the two to make it clear that they are two very different things.
You shouldn't chris. Is there some sort of cap?
No, he's just referencing Catfish making alternate accounts evertime he reaches 666 posts.

@chrisname you should join IRC.
Last edited on
Pages: 1... 3456