home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
- Path: peer-news.britain.eu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!voder!nsc!rustler!toml
- From: toml@rustler.nsc.com (Thomas Likens)
- Subject: Re: C vs C++ urgently needed Please
- Message-ID: <DKxHL5.Eru@nsc.nsc.com>
- Sender: news@nsc.nsc.com (netnews maintenance)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rustler.nsc.com
- Reply-To: toml@rustler.nsc.com (Thomas Likens)
- Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
- References: <819936532.7746@shuh.demon.co.uk> <DKC41u.MGI@news.cis.umn.edu> <820144728snz@intellic.demon.co.uk> <4crp9s$ntb@homesick.cs.unlv.edu> <ALUN.CHAMPION.96Jan9112246@g7240065.bridge.bst.bls.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 19:17:29 GMT
-
- In article <ALUN.CHAMPION.96Jan9112246@g7240065.bridge.bst.bls.com>, Alun.Champion@bridge.bst.bls.com (Alun Champion) writes:
- |> In article <4crp9s$ntb@homesick.cs.unlv.edu> wiseman@unlv.edu (Christopher A Weiss) writes:
- |>
- |> : If you want an interesting wuestion though, try to figure out why they
- |> : called it C++ when (by convention) it should have been called ++C.
- |>
- |> By which convention should it be ++C ?
- |> Most early books (see Kernighan & Ritchie) use the postfix increment operator
- |> if the value of the increment wasn't necessary ie.
- |>
- |> for (i = 0; i < someValue; i++) {
- |> ... ^^^
- |> }
- |>
- |> So by that convention it should be C++ - which it is ;')
- |>
- |> Regards
- |>
- |> -A.
-
- By the convention that C was updated (incremented) and then used, so
- it should be ++C.
-
- --Tom
-