C++ writing int to binary file

Alex Esplin alex.esplin at gmail.com
Tue Apr 28 15:52:23 MDT 2009


On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 15:04, Bryan Sant <bryan.sant at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Nicholas Leippe <nick at leippe.com> wrote:
>> I totally agree with the reasoning, and feel that assembly should be a
>> requirement simply for the understanding it provides. You think differently
>> when programming in any language once you've learned assembly and consider
>> what's happening underneath.
>
> I agree to both.  Writing the same application in asm, C, C++, Java,
> and Python would be an excellent exercise for students of the craft
> IMHO.

In the tail end of the CS program at BYU, I'd have to say that the C++
experience we get (CS 240) is less than conducive to providing a C++
experience that leaves us wanting to learn more about it.  The class
is just fine, but the C++ experience it provides is one of the things
that was instrumental in leaving me with a bad aftertaste over C++.
And if students need experience with "low-level" languages, it's hard
to go wrong with C.  There's no "new/delete" obscuring memory
management, and a one-week, in-class-only introduction to C++
templates is IMO worse than none at all.

I'm well aware of the widespread use of C++ in industry, and well
aware of what it's capable of.  I just think that if you're trying to
inspire understanding of your code's impact on the hardware, C is more
effective.  One good thing about the C++ crash course of CS 240 is it
taught me a lot about what to look for/like/dislike in a language.
For my class projects I now use Objective-C wherever possible, or
straight C.  And when I went looking for a job, I specifically went
looking for a job where we use C.

-- 
Alex Esplin



More information about the PLUG mailing list