Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Regular Coder Deacon Frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Between the Lines
    Posts
    279
    Thanks
    31
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Is C+ a language?

    I have a guy on a team of mine who says he knows "C+". I've always remembered C+ not even being in existence... and mocking people who claimed to know it O.o?

    Quote Originally Posted by 0ld syth3 m3mb3r View Post
    C+
    Quote Originally Posted by Deacon Frost View Post
    Wtf is that?
    Quote Originally Posted by 0ld syth3 m3mb3r View Post
    Simular to C++ but it deals solely on gaming with HTML
    Quote Originally Posted by Deacon Frost View Post
    Wow O.o. I've seriously never heard of it :P.
    Quote Originally Posted by 0ld syth3 m3mb3r View Post
    I teach you some day young grasshopper
    And, I'm pretty sure it's non-existent. I mean, it sounds like... a web language? Because it deals with markup?

    Wtf is it?

  • #2
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Hampshire, America
    Posts
    246
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    No such thing, completely fictional. If you know anything about programming you should recognize the syntax:
    Code:
    int i = 1;
    i++;
    // i Now = 2, as ++ is the post-fix increment operator
    if (i == 2)
       MessageBoxA(NULL, "Wow, I'm not retarted.", "Congratulations, me.", MB_OK);
    else
       MessageBoxA(NULL, "C+ is a language.", "I believe in fairies and religion.", MB_ABORTMYLIFE);
    Sorry for the rampant sarcasm, had a little too much wine....

  • Users who have thanked Dunna for this post:

    RabidMango (07-22-2009)

  • #3
    Rockstar Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,074
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 328 Times in 324 Posts
    Yeah, it doesn't exist, at least not relating to C or C++. Some people thing that because C++ has two pluses there had to be a C+, which isn't true. (The two pluses coming from the C syntax meaning increment by one)

    Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B#Etymology

    The only language that ever had c+ in the name isn't related to C++.
    Last edited by oracleguy; 07-20-2009 at 04:04 AM.
    OracleGuy

  • #4
    Regular Coder Deacon Frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Between the Lines
    Posts
    279
    Thanks
    31
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by oracleguy View Post
    Yeah, it doesn't exist, at least not relating to C or C++. Some people thing that because C++ has two pluses there had to be a C+, which isn't true. (The two pluses coming from the C syntax meaning increment by one)

    Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B#Etymology

    The only language that ever had c+ in the name isn't related to C++.
    Wait, so C+ does exist, just not in relation to C/C++?

    And yeah, I kinda figured it was ++ because of increment.

  • #5
    Rockstar Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,074
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 328 Times in 324 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Deacon Frost View Post
    Wait, so C+ does exist, just not in relation to C/C++?

    And yeah, I kinda figured it was ++ because of increment.
    Yes, the actual name is ABCL/c+, but its this funky concurrent language that I bet hardly anyone on the planet even knows muchless practices anymore.
    Last edited by oracleguy; 07-20-2009 at 06:28 AM.
    OracleGuy

  • #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Web Designer
    Posts
    321
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts

  • #7
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    527
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 74 Times in 72 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by it career View Post
    That's C+-, not C+

    C+ doesn't even show up at Esolang.

    All I guess C+ to be would be: typos, idiots, a joke.
    Trinithis

  • #8
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Derby, UK
    Posts
    97
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Trinithis View Post
    All I guess C+ to be would be: typos, idiots, a joke.
    Or they meant c# ?

  • #9
    Regular Coder Deacon Frost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Between the Lines
    Posts
    279
    Thanks
    31
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Nah, it wasn't a typo :P

    Well my whole list?

    CSS
    C
    C+
    C++
    Java
    Cms-2
    Action Script
    HTML
    Apple Script
    VBscript
    and im great with PhP

    ( I can read but cant code HLA , High Level Assembly )

    I want to learn RSL ( Robot Scripting )
    and microcode
    But if it DOES actually exist.... where are the reference sheets? Something I can use to learn it, so I can see if he actually knows it :P.

  • #10
    Rockstar Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,074
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 328 Times in 324 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Deacon Frost View Post
    Nah, it wasn't a typo :P

    But if it DOES actually exist.... where are the reference sheets? Something I can use to learn it, so I can see if he actually knows it :P.
    Ok, with that example, it looks like it is complete BS. Like I said and maybe I didn't make it clear, the only language that ever some times got referenced as c+ was ABCL/c+ which is utterly and completely unrelated to C++ and I seriously doubt that they were referring to it.

    Why don't you ask them what compiler they use for 'C+'? See what they say.

    I can read but cant code HLA , High Level Assembly
    Generally if you know how to read and understand a programming language, you are also at least some what adept at writing it. Since to read and understand the code, you'd have to be familiar with the constructs and syntax, which is what you also need to know to write it.

    I've seen people like this before, you are wasting your time trying to prove them wrong. They will never, ever admit to being wrong.
    OracleGuy

  • #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    There is obviously no such thing as C+. Sorry to repeat a point already made, but maybe it needs to be put into the right words.

    C++ was so-named because the difference in being able to increment a variable with just a double plus was, apparently, quite representative of the overall way in which it improved on C, that's what I read in a big book on it which I probably left in my parents house when i was deciding whether there's anything else in the world outside of Linux and Perl.

    i.e. before C++, you had to say $thing=$thing+1;
    or something (i forget how other languages write their variables, i just default to perl) whereas thanks to the improvement on C, you could now say $thing++, and save lots of writing.

    Consequently it does not make any sense for anything called C+ to exist, it just could not. There would not be any meaning in the name. Hence why the follow-on to C++ wasn't in fact C+++ or C-squared or anything of that nature - they had to just move in a whole new direction.

    In case anyone's wondering there is no C-flat to complement C-sharp, either. But I'll trust you guys with a trade secret - the operating system which will replace microsoft and apple and the whole lot of them, to be made by me, built on a foundation of a.i. is to be called "Grapes" - and the reason is that you can pick little nuggets off it one by one and use em. It's an o.s. that works in bunches. Lovely stuff. Eg if you want to build a system to do something, you pick a grape here and a grape there - one for making a window that does x or y, one for making a file-saving function that does z or p - you get the idea. Hell, maybe I'll start working on it this week. Nah. I've got less important things to do, may as well get on with those, in keeping with the law of dynamic negatives.
    Last edited by RabidMango; 07-22-2009 at 10:57 PM.

  • #12
    Rockstar Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,074
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 328 Times in 324 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by RabidMango View Post
    i.e. before C++, you had to say $thing=$thing+1;
    or something (i forget how other languages write their variables, i just default to perl) whereas thanks to the improvement on C, you could now say $thing++, and save lots of writing.
    That isn't quite accurate, the increment and decrement operators were apart of C before C++. It is a pretty basic instruction that's why there is analog to it in almost every language. In fact in the x86 architecture there is a specific increment processor instruction.

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidMango View Post
    Hence why the follow-on to C++ wasn't in fact C+++ or C-squared or anything of that nature - they had to just move in a whole new direction.
    Which follow on would that be? If you are referring to C#, that isn't really a follow on, it is a completely different thing. You could say C# was influenced by C++ in the sense that a lot of the syntax is the same but they are very different languages.
    OracleGuy

  • #13
    God Emperor Fou-Lu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
    Posts
    16,994
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 2,662 Times in 2,631 Posts
    C# can be dirty coded as well to include C/C++ (I think its C# that has the dirtycode block in it?). I hate it when people do that >.<

    My favorite is how few people seem to know the differences between how ++i versus i++ actually operates. Most of the students I tutor when they come to C are always asking why this doesn't do anything:
    Code:
    void increment(int *ip)
    {
        *ip++; // doesn't work, they revert to *ip = *ip +1;
    }
    Nothing beats explaining that it does indeed work as expected, but the final result is overwritten by the original when the stack memory is destroyed. On the otherhand, ++*ip; does work as it should. Best I know, its simply because post increments allocate an under-the-hood temporary variable which it adds one back onto before reassigning it to ip. This of course would take the current scope which is stack not static. I gots that right Kev?
    PHP Code:
    header('HTTP/1.1 420 Enhance Your Calm'); 
    Been gone for a few months, and haven't programmed in that long of a time. Meh, I'll wing it ;)

  • #14
    Rockstar Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,074
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 328 Times in 324 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fou-Lu View Post
    C# can be dirty coded as well to include C/C++ (I think its C# that has the dirtycode block in it?). I hate it when people do that >.<

    My favorite is how few people seem to know the differences between how ++i versus i++ actually operates. Most of the students I tutor when they come to C are always asking why this doesn't do anything:
    Code:
    void increment(int *ip)
    {
        *ip++; // doesn't work, they revert to *ip = *ip +1;
    }
    Nothing beats explaining that it does indeed work as expected, but the final result is overwritten by the original when the stack memory is destroyed. On the otherhand, ++*ip; does work as it should. Best I know, its simply because post increments allocate an under-the-hood temporary variable which it adds one back onto before reassigning it to ip. This of course would take the current scope which is stack not static. I gots that right Kev?
    Yeah, that is the general idea. *ip++ is just a weird bit of coding as far as it can be deceiving on what is actually going on. But since you brought it up I thought I'd show you. I compiled your function into a C program and generated the mixed listing file.

    This is with the post operator:
    Code:
    _increment PROC						; COMDAT
    
    ; 4    : {
    
    	push	ebp
    	mov	ebp, esp
    	sub	esp, 64					; 00000040H
    	push	ebx
    	push	esi
    	push	edi
    
    ; 5    :     *ip++; // doesn't work, they revert to *ip = *ip +1;
    
    	mov	eax, DWORD PTR _ip$[ebp]
    	add	eax, 4
    	mov	DWORD PTR _ip$[ebp], eax
    
    ; 6    : }
    
    	pop	edi
    	pop	esi
    	pop	ebx
    	mov	esp, ebp
    	pop	ebp
    	ret	0
    _increment ENDP
    Notice how it loads the address into eax and adds 4, that's because you are incrementing the address, not the value at that address.

    And with the pre operator:

    Code:
    _increment PROC						; COMDAT
    
    ; 4    : {
    
    	push	ebp
    	mov	ebp, esp
    	sub	esp, 64					; 00000040H
    	push	ebx
    	push	esi
    	push	edi
    
    ; 5    :     ++*ip; // doesn't work, they revert to *ip = *ip +1;
    
    	mov	eax, DWORD PTR _ip$[ebp]
    	mov	ecx, DWORD PTR [eax]
    	add	ecx, 1
    	mov	edx, DWORD PTR _ip$[ebp]
    	mov	DWORD PTR [edx], ecx
    
    ; 6    : }
    
    	pop	edi
    	pop	esi
    	pop	ebx
    	mov	esp, ebp
    	pop	ebp
    	ret	0
    _increment ENDP
    Now notice how it uses an additional register, ecx to hold the value after 1 is added. This line mov ecx, DWORD PTR [eax] is where the pointer is being dereferenced.

    Now this is a debug build with no optimizations on so it reads in the value of the pointer twice, it could re-use the value in eax instead of using the one in edx.

    We've branched a little off topic but it is a cool thing to look at.
    Last edited by oracleguy; 07-23-2009 at 04:22 AM.
    OracleGuy

  • #15
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Derby, UK
    Posts
    97
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by oracleguy View Post
    That isn't quite accurate, the increment and decrement operators were apart of C before C++. It is a pretty basic instruction that's why there is analog to it in almost every language. In fact in the x86 architecture there is a specific increment processor instruction.
    +1 (or should that be ++)

    From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B

    Etymology
    According to Stroustrup: "the name signifies the evolutionary nature of the changes from C".[5] During C++'s development period, the language had been referred to as "new C", then "C with Classes". The final name is credited to Rick Mascitti (mid-1983) and was first used in December 1983. When Mascitti was questioned informally in 1992 about the naming, he indicated that it was given in a tongue-in-cheek spirit. It stems from C's "++" operator (which increments the value of a variable) and a common naming convention of using "+" to indicate an enhanced computer program. There is no language called "C plus". ABCL/c+ was the name of an earlier, unrelated programming language.
    so that is pretty clear...


  •  
    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •