[LONG][RANTY] Roguelike in QBasic?

[na_th_an]

I do like Java's OO model, but it's a bit overdone IMO. Everything doesn't have to be an object.

But that's the OO paradygm : "everything is an object". That's why C++ is not a true OO language.

[DrV]

Yeah, but I like having the cake and eating it too...


*paradigm*

[na_th_an]

lol

[Gamefreak]

I agree that some components of C++ are bad, but I still think C++ is the best langauge out right now, at least for programming games. C is very similar to C++, but since I learned C++ right off the bat, I have no experience in it, but I do know some things. C doesnt have templates, which can be really time-saving. DirectX is for C++, not C, so if you want to have a decent windows game, learn C++. Oh yea, Windows uses C++ too (you can do it in C, but you might as well shoot yourself). C++ has classes. I don't see whats so hard about mixing OOP with procedural programming - its like that so you can do it how you want to. Pretty much everything commercial uses C++, so learn to like it if you every want a job. C++ is just as fast as C, and sometimes faster

BTW, Can you please further explain what you mean by "ambigous syntax problems", LooseCaboose?

[DrV]

Oh yea, Windows uses C++ too (you can do it in C, but you might as well shoot yourself)

Hmm... I recall that the original author of C++ said something like "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it more difficult, but when you do, you blow off your whole leg."

:lol:

[Agamemnus]

Aaarrgh! Orderly discussions!!!!!


WHERE ARE THE MISSILES? THE BOMBS??!!?

lobs a WMD at Nathan

[LooseCaboose]

C is very similar to C++

C++ is very similar to C, its derived from it in fact. The original C++ compiler was written in C.

DirectX is for C++, not C

Since when? DIrectX and OpenGL are both compatible with C and a number of other languages also.

Oh yea, Windows uses C++ too (you can do it in C, but you might as well shoot yourself).

Again, since when? Nobody is forcing you to write object orientated code if you want it to run in Windows.

I don't see whats so hard about mixing OOP with procedural programming

Its not that its hard, its bad design. OO is a programming paradigm, in pure OO you only have objects (Java is almost there, but there are some problems with basic types, eg int and Integer). IMHO if you think you need both procedural and OO code in the same program you need to rethink your design.

Pretty much everything commercial uses C++

WindowsNT: C, ASM, minimal amount of C++
Linux: C, ASM
OpenGL: C, ASM
Together (Development enviroment): Java
Mozilla: C++ core with XML layers
Quake/Quake2: C, ASM

Are just a few examples of commercial products that dont rely heavily of C++. C++ and other low-level languages are being steered away from nowdays, and more modern languages such as Java, XML and TCL/TK are being used more and more.

BTW, Can you please further explain what you mean by "ambigous syntax problems", LooseCaboose?

The most well known one is the following. This code wont compile as expected:

Code:

std::vector<std::vector<int>> x;

Because the parser inteprets the final >> as the right shift operator. The designers should have realised this very early on and fixed it rather than requiring the programmer to use the following workaround:

Code:

std::vector<std::vector<int> > x;

From http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~loew...ects.html/. Check the link for more:

Consider

struct A{
struct B{};
};

A::B C();

namespace B{
A C();
}


struct Test{
friend A::B ::C();
};

Here, it is not clear whether the friend declaration denotes A B::C(), or A::B C(), yet the standard does not resolve this ambiguity.

....

Well, he said that "all the components you'll need come with the standard class library"

I meant for developing a typical desktop application, of course it doesnt have everything ranging from embedded apps to whiz-bang graphics.

[na_th_an]

DirectX is for C++, not C, so if you want to have a decent windows game, learn C++

Not true. You can use DirectX even from VB. I've used DX from C.

Oh yea, Windows uses C++ too (you can do it in C, but you might as well shoot yourself).

You can code Windows without C++.

I don't see whats so hard about mixing OOP with procedural programming

I didn't say hard, I said "bad".

pretty much everything commercial uses C++, so learn to like it if you every want a job.

I'm in my last year in computer engineering, and I still haven't find a reason to learn C++. And I'll be working next year. Of course it depends on what you will doing.

C++ is just as fast as C, and sometimes faster

No language is faster than another. It is a matter of how good your compiler is.

But if you like it, use it but don't say it is good, 'cause it is used by many people. C++ is really bad designed and not true OO. If it is useful, maybe, if it works, ok, it does, but it doesn't make it well designed.

And as loosecaboose said, if you need procedural stuff in your OO program, then you have a problem with your design. OO stuff doesn't need procedural stuff.

[Jocke The Beast]

Ahhh... I just wish that someone could make a great Rogue-clone-engine and then I could use it, and edit it, to make my own little roguelike game.... yep, I've tried to make one myself but....nope, it's hard and I'm way too lazy right now :roll:

"Feci guod potui, faciant meliora potentes"
- I've done all that I could, now let thoose who can make it better