Re:Popular Myths about C++, Part 1
by throwawayaway on Wednesday December 10, 2014 @12:06PM
(#8730229)
>Use struts when you just need a data container. Use classes when you need to add behaviour. Simple rule,
> A struct is a C++ data type that offers the same set of features as a class, just with a public access as default.
these are lies. at this point it's a semantic argument, what you mean by "understand" is "use". what i mean by understand is its dictionary meaning.
to answer your questions, no you don't need to explain them or teach C to them because the syntax for struct in those languages is not identical to C. that is why. because they are not C structs. "C++ structs" are C structs with some syntatic sugar applied. C structs will not compile in those languages. C structs are not valid code in those languages.
I am aware of the long list of minor incompatibilities between C89 and C++, and how C++11 has removed some and added more
In short you know nothing about this I don't already know and you are quite happy to knowingly deceive your students. i object but there's no point in debating with you further.
> A struct is a C++ data type that offers the same set of features as a class, just with a public access as default.
these are lies. at this point it's a semantic argument, what you mean by "understand" is "use". what i mean by understand is its dictionary meaning.
to answer your questions, no you don't need to explain them or teach C to them because the syntax for struct in those languages is not identical to C. that is why. because they are not C structs. "C++ structs" are C structs with some syntatic sugar applied. C structs will not compile in those languages. C structs are not valid code in those languages.
I am aware of the long list of minor incompatibilities between C89 and C++, and how C++11 has removed some and added more
In short you know nothing about this I don't already know and you are quite happy to knowingly deceive your students. i object but there's no point in debating with you further.