[TIB] Re: C vs C++
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
[TIB] Re: C vs C++
Stdio.h is a standard IO library.
In a message dated 11/9/2002 4:51:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, jtkirk86@bellsouth.net writes:
>
>
>
> Ok this has been bugging me I just started C stuff today printed the
> manual learn it in 24 days. And I did some Fahrenheit - Celsius tables
> and it says the first line #include <stdio.h> well my question is what
> the heck is that, some massive library? Or just a common file. If you
> could please fill me in on its uses and what it is. Thanks
> Jeremy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ti-basic-bounce@lists.ticalc.org
> [mailto:ti-basic-bounce@lists.ticalc.org] On Behalf Of
> Nitrocloud@aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 1:34 PM
> To: ti-basic@lists.ticalc.org
> Subject: [TIB] Re: C vs C++
>
>
> I also know this, but most libraries distributed from different
> companies fo rC may not even be the same, such as Kenigan's Learning C
> may require a different stdio.h compare to a different comapny
>
>
> In a message dated 11/8/2002 10:58:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> jwzumwalt@neatinfo.com writes:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > I was watching this thread and thought that you should be
> complimented. I am
> > a professional programmer and have gotten into thinking of C as just a
> light
> > version of C++. But you are entirely correct, the two really should
> not be
> > compared to each other!
> > Jan Zumwalt
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ti-basic-bounce@lists.ticalc.org
> > [mailto:ti-basic-bounce@lists.ticalc.org]On Behalf Of Arthur J.
> O'Dwyer
> > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 5:46 PM
> > To: ti-basic@lists.ticalc.org
> > Subject: [TIB] Re: ti-basic Digest V2 #107
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Gary Sparkes <kb3hag@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > c++ compilers ALWAYS work for c, c++ is backwards compatable and
> such
> > >
> > > Nitrocloud@aol.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > C++ always contains C.
> > > >
> >
> > Even though this thread is now way off-topic, I must point out that
> > C and C++ are not really compatible in either direction; there is
> quite
> > a lot of C code that is not at all compatible with modern C++, and at
> > least in theory a C++ compiler COULD refuse to compile programs that
> > use <stdio.h>, do not cast the result of malloc(), contain
> pathological
> > comment constructs, or any number of other things!
> > Usually it's a safe bet that your C++ compiler has C support, but
> > it's not a given. I suggest reading
> comp.lang.learn.c-c++
> > for more
> > (on-topic) information.
> >
> > -Arthur
Follow-Ups: