What about C ?

Hi everyone !
I want to ask you why no-one talk about the programming language C ? It's the first language I have learned (I'm way better with Lua) and I want to know what are the differences between C++; C# and C ?
Thanks you

I'm pretty sure C# has little or nothing to do with C/C++ however C++ is (I believe) an extended and enchanced version of C, that's why more people use C++ and is also why people often suggest to learn C before you go to C++.

billysback, on 01 December 2012 - 05:30 AM said:

I'm pretty sure C# has little or nothing to do with C/C++ however C++ is (I believe) an extended and enchanced version of C, that's why more people use C++ and is also why people often suggest to learn C before you go to C++.

The man who have teach me C said that C++, C and C# have nothing to do together but I want to know why you advice to people to learn C++ or C# instead of C ?

The major difference between C and C++ is that C++ allows OOP. You will see that C is used at Kernel level software, drivers for hardware devices while C++ is used at application and server development.

1v2l3a4m5e6n, on 01 December 2012 - 05:40 AM said:

The major difference between C and C++ is that C++ allows OOP. You will see that C is used at Kernel level software, drivers for hardware devices while C++ is used at application and server development.

Ok thanks you :)/> so I think I'll have to learn C++ :P/>

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

Jasonfran, on 01 December 2012 - 06:36 AM said:

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

I prefer C# immensely.

tiin57, on 01 December 2012 - 08:26 AM said:

Jasonfran, on 01 December 2012 - 06:36 AM said:

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

I prefer C# immensely.

Wait, what? The guy with the Java logo as his profile picture and his title is "Java Lunatic" prefers C#. Does not compute.

Dlcruz129, on 01 December 2012 - 12:55 PM said:

tiin57, on 01 December 2012 - 08:26 AM said:

Jasonfran, on 01 December 2012 - 06:36 AM said:

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

I prefer C# immensely.

Wait, what? The guy with the Java logo as his profile picture and his title is "Java Lunatic" prefers C#. Does not compute.

C# doesn't have an awesome logo. ;)/>

Dlcruz129, on 01 December 2012 - 12:55 PM said:

tiin57, on 01 December 2012 - 08:26 AM said:

Jasonfran, on 01 December 2012 - 06:36 AM said:

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

I prefer C# immensely.

Wait, what? The guy with the Java logo as his profile picture and his title is "Java Lunatic" prefers C#. Does not compute.

I meant I prefer C# to C++. C++ is terribad.
Of course, Java kicks ass. That's a given. :P/>

tiin57, on 02 December 2012 - 10:16 AM said:

Dlcruz129, on 01 December 2012 - 12:55 PM said:

tiin57, on 01 December 2012 - 08:26 AM said:

Jasonfran, on 01 December 2012 - 06:36 AM said:

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

I prefer C# immensely.

Wait, what? The guy with the Java logo as his profile picture and his title is "Java Lunatic" prefers C#. Does not compute.

I meant I prefer C# to C++. C++ is terribad.
Of course, Java kicks ass. That's a given. :P/>

C++ Is awesome, it dominates Java IMO.

1v2l3a4m5e6n, on 02 December 2012 - 12:40 PM said:

tiin57, on 02 December 2012 - 10:16 AM said:

Dlcruz129, on 01 December 2012 - 12:55 PM said:

tiin57, on 01 December 2012 - 08:26 AM said:

Jasonfran, on 01 December 2012 - 06:36 AM said:

C# is fairly easy to understand if you have used Java or vise versa as they are very similar, whereas C++ is more powerful yet have a very different syntax

I prefer C# immensely.

Wait, what? The guy with the Java logo as his profile picture and his title is "Java Lunatic" prefers C#. Does not compute.

I meant I prefer C# to C++. C++ is terribad.
Of course, Java kicks ass. That's a given. :P/>

C++ Is awesome, it dominates Java IMO.

Java is the best. Its fast, and practically every computer has the JRE.

Dlcruz129, on 02 December 2012 - 12:46 PM said:

Java is the best. Its fast, and practically every computer has the JRE.

Fast?…

thesbros, on 02 December 2012 - 12:54 PM said:

Dlcruz129, on 02 December 2012 - 12:46 PM said:

Java is the best. Its fast, and practically every computer has the JRE.

Fast?…

Faster than C, at least.

Dlcruz129, on 02 December 2012 - 01:55 PM said:

thesbros, on 02 December 2012 - 12:54 PM said:

Dlcruz129, on 02 December 2012 - 12:46 PM said:

Java is the best. Its fast, and practically every computer has the JRE.

Fast?…

Faster than C, at least.

Wrong. In some cases it might be faster then C, but in general, C is faster. Also, there is no such thing as the best language.

Honestly, I prefer Java, though if I had to use C# I wouldn't throw as much of a fit as if I had to use C++/C (I really hate the syntax.)

russjr08, on 06 December 2012 - 04:49 AM said:

Honestly, I prefer Java, though if I had to use C# I wouldn't throw as much of a fit as if I had to use C++/C (I really hate the syntax.)

Agreed, the syntax of Java/C# is really nice.

It's impossible for an interpreted language (java) to be faster than a language ( C ) whose programs are compiled, assembled to machine code, and then optimized. I can't see how java could possibly be faster than 1/8 of the speed of C, and that's looking at it at the assembly level. I will show you a comparison in assembly (not x86, however) if you don't believe me.

electrodude512, on 06 December 2012 - 10:44 AM said:

It's impossible for an interpreted language (java) to be faster than a language ( C ) whose programs are compiled, assembled to machine code, and then optimized. I can't see how java could possibly be faster than 1/8 of the speed of C, and that's looking at it at the assembly level. I will show you a comparison in assembly (not x86, however) if you don't believe me.

You are aware of the fact that a considerable part of a java program is being compiled to native bytecode nowadays, right?

Orwell, on 06 December 2012 - 11:06 AM said:

electrodude512, on 06 December 2012 - 10:44 AM said:

It's impossible for an interpreted language (java) to be faster than a language ( C ) whose programs are compiled, assembled to machine code, and then optimized. I can't see how java could possibly be faster than 1/8 of the speed of C, and that's looking at it at the assembly level. I will show you a comparison in assembly (not x86, however) if you don't believe me.

You are aware of the fact that a considerable part of a java program is being compiled to native bytecode nowadays, right?

hand optimized c/c++ is still faster. there is a reason that highly demanding games are written in c++ and not java… Photoshop, 3ds max these types of programs need every ouch of power and as such use c++. however if your app is only using 5% of the systems resources then that argument is irrelevant and java offers a lot of time saving development features. Not to say java is slow… it is by no means slow and getting closer to c every day. the nature of the languages means that java will never be as fast as c, however as processors upgrade and java is further optimized the difference in speed will matter to fewer and fewer applications

electrodude512, on 06 December 2012 - 10:44 AM said:

It's impossible for an interpreted language (java) to be faster than a language ( C ) whose programs are compiled, assembled to machine code, and then optimized. I can't see how java could possibly be faster than 1/8 of the speed of C, and that's looking at it at the assembly level. I will show you a comparison in assembly (not x86, however) if you don't believe me.

Java is compiled into bytecode, and the JRE compiles the bytecode into machine code and optimizes it as it runs. Java is generally a bit slower than C, but still comparable, and for many applications the savings in development time outweigh the decrease in speed.

What about C I ask?