101–110 of 129 posts
I think the problem with learning C is that you need to learn stuff like make, autoconf, how the compiler + preprocessors work (what do all those flags even mean!?), how making "cross-platform" stuff works, how to pull in and use "libraries", C-isms, how to test, etc. C itself is a very small and simple language, but the tooling and patterns are old and mysterious. In college I learned how to program embedded systems…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I reccomend "Programming in the UNIX Environment" by Kernighan and Pike. Partly because it was written so soon after UNIX and C themselves, it has very little of the modern 'cruft' in it. It's at the level of "cc program.c -o program". Make is fairly easy to learn, at least in its basic form. Autoconf is horrendous.
> Make is fairly easy to learn, at least in its basic form. Autoconf is horrendous. I completely agree. Make is extremely flexible on it's own. I don't understand the need to abstract the build system to generate thousand-line makefiles that are impossible to hand edit.
Why do presentations always get interpreted vs compiled wrong? It's not a property of a language it's a property of the runtime. For example Java is interpreted on old versions, JIT compiled on the desktop and compiled AoT in Android...
When using preprocessor macros in C/C++, these only make sense with a compilation step. But they are part of the language, are they not?
In interpreted languages, you generally have an eval function/command that lets the interpreter execute any dynamically constructed code. That eval function arguably is percieved as part of the language, but only works in an interpreted environment.
I think the problem with learning C is that you need to learn stuff like make, autoconf, how the compiler + preprocessors work (what do all those flags even mean!?), how making "cross-platform" stuff works, how to pull in and use "libraries", C-isms, how to test, etc. C itself is a very small and simple language, but the tooling and patterns are old and mysterious. In college I learned how to program embedded systems…
Personally, the hardest part for me was keeping track of the size of everything. Coming from a higher level language, keeping track of the bits and bytes takes some getting used to. Working with arrays in C is much tougher especially when the compiler will compile almost anything you give it, and even a small mistake is catastrophic. Before C, I was pampered and took everything for granted. Now I appreciated my life…
I was hoping this would actually tell me how to accomplish something in C. I know all about pointers and memory, but I don't know anything about the current state if C development. What libraries do people use? What are common memory management strategies? Etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I reccomend "Programming in the UNIX Environment" by Kernighan and Pike. Partly because it was written so soon after UNIX and C themselves, it has very little of the modern 'cruft' in it. It's at the level of "cc program.c -o program". Make is fairly easy to learn, at least in its basic form. Autoconf is horrendous.
> Make is fairly easy to learn, at least in its basic form. Autoconf is horrendous. I completely agree. Make is extremely flexible on it's own. I don't understand the need to abstract the build system to generate thousand-line makefiles that are impossible to hand edit.
Of course, that imposes the cost of 100% compatibility on every developer, when most would be happy to just build on today's Linux and call it a day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. It's impossible to have actual modular code in C. A real shock for people coming from higher level languages.
What exactly do you mean by modular code in your context? edit: Oh, you probably meant modules integrated directly in the language. I was surprised to read that since modular design is highly successful and useful in C.
I mean that in many languages it's at least possible to write code that can be understood fully in isolation. Objected-oriented programming, etc, etc.
In C that's impossible. Due to UB being global.
I think the problem with learning C is that you need to learn stuff like make, autoconf, how the compiler + preprocessors work (what do all those flags even mean!?), how making "cross-platform" stuff works, how to pull in and use "libraries", C-isms, how to test, etc. C itself is a very small and simple language, but the tooling and patterns are old and mysterious. In college I learned how to program embedded systems…
Personally, the hardest part for me was keeping track of the size of everything. Coming from a higher level language, keeping track of the bits and bytes takes some getting used to. Working with arrays in C is much tougher especially when the compiler will compile almost anything you give it, and even a small mistake is catastrophic. Before C, I was pampered and took everything for granted. Now I appreciated my life…
I think the problem with learning C is that you need to learn stuff like make, autoconf, how the compiler + preprocessors work (what do all those flags even mean!?), how making "cross-platform" stuff works, how to pull in and use "libraries", C-isms, how to test, etc. C itself is a very small and simple language, but the tooling and patterns are old and mysterious. In college I learned how to program embedded systems…
Personally, the hardest part for me was keeping track of the size of everything. Coming from a higher level language, keeping track of the bits and bytes takes some getting used to. Working with arrays in C is much tougher especially when the compiler will compile almost anything you give it, and even a small mistake is catastrophic. Before C, I was pampered and took everything for granted. Now I appreciated my life…