Proper way to learn c ?

[Desperado]

Hi, Sven,

so here is my favourite
http://esolangs.org/wiki/Ook!

[ZirconiumX]

Hi, Sven,

so here is my favourite
http://esolangs.org/wiki/Ook!

And you haven't noticed SQRT???

I *do* wonder who created that.

Matthew:out

[syzygy]

Huh. C++ is a superset of C. So I really don't see why Torvalds wanted to rewrite the kernel in C++,
that's completely stupid as it would break existing C programs.

I see two reasons why that "C++ rewrite" of the Linux kernel failed:

1) You cannot simply "rewrite" something as complex as an OS kernel in C++ unless you also redesign it. A procedural-style software of that magnitude will remain procedural even if you introduce some classes, inheritance, something here and something there. I don't say that Linus made no attempt of a redesign but at least "rewriting in C++" does not suggest to me he did so.

According to this source, it was not a redesign, but just an effort to get it to compile with g++ (presumably to allow certain C++ features to be used):

In the dark old days, in the time that most of you hadn't even heard of the word "Linux", the kernel was once modified to be compiled under g++. That lasted for a few revisions. People complained about the performance drop. It turned out that compiling a piece of C code with g++ would give you worse code. It shouldn't have made a difference, but it did. Been there, done that.

Huh. C++ is a superset of C. So I really don't see why Torvalds wanted to rewrite the kernel in C++,
that's completely stupid as it would break existing C programs.

I don't see why a kernel written in C++ could not run existing C programs.

[mar]

I don't see why a kernel written in C++ could not run existing C programs.

Name mangling being reason #1 (overloading). There's more, much more
EDIT: Absolutely agree with Sven and Daniel.

[mar]

Hi, Sven,

so here is my favourite
http://esolangs.org/wiki/Ook!

Reminds me of brainfuck
EDIT: uh ok, got it

[syzygy]

I don't see why a kernel written in C++ could not run existing C programs.

Name mangling being reason #1 (overloading). There's more, much more

Do you realise that Linux executables are not linked against kernel object code?

Name mangling is not an issue here at all.

[mar]

Do you realise that Linux executables are not linked against kernel object code?

Name mangling is not an issue here at all.

No I don't Against CRT then? So all you have to do is use extern "C"
Cool. Very C++ish

[syzygy]

Do you realise that Linux executables are not linked against kernel object code?

Name mangling is not an issue here at all.

No I don't Against CRT then? So all you have to do is use extern "C"
Cool. Very C++ish

Huh? Do you know what the Linux kernel is? It is not the C library....

[mar]

Huh? Do you know what the Linux kernel is? It is not the C library....

You tell me. You don't link against kernel directly. You don't link against CRT. That sounds like magic
EDIT: how do you open a file then? You leave an email to Linus?

[syzygy]

Huh? Do you know what the Linux kernel is? It is not the C library....

You tell me. You don't link against kernel directly. You don't link against CRT. That sounds like magic
EDIT: how do you open a file then? You leave an email to Linus?

No, the normal way is to link against glibc, which will then invoke the kernel using a system call. Making a system call can only be implemented in assembly and you will not notice any difference between C and C++ there.