D is much better, and is a *proper* replacement for C, i.e. for something close to assembly code. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ A whoever said PHP is a derivative of C, you have no idea what you're talking about, so stay on PHP...
> K&R was the best language book ever too!
I've read it in Italian, but found its prose to be often confusing over syntax details (and I read it when I knew C), especially for the newbie.
That said, it's the only C book I've ever read which explains typedef correctly. All other say just that "typedef A B;" makes B a synonym of A.
Which doesn't work as soon as you "typedef int (*pfunc_t)(void);". And I'm particularly pissed by this problem of most book.
Discussion (17)
See this claim.
I won't vote yes only because what Brain said. :/
Brian* sorry.
See: "http://www.smallwhitecube.com/?id=20061227172850":here
whomp. no textile support. oh well.
C is an assembler in a clown suit, carrying an Uzi.
C does all the real work.
i only agree because PHP is a derivative of C
PHP & Python are, not C, not C++.
D is much better, and is a *proper* replacement for C, i.e. for something close to assembly code. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
A whoever said PHP is a derivative of C, you have no idea what you're talking about, so stay on PHP...
I liked B, but C took over. Go figure.
Anyway, real programmers design their own AST.
ASM FTW
RE: K&R was the best language book ever too!
Yes.
Perl FTW.
Real men use C.
> K&R was the best language book ever too!
I've read it in Italian, but found its prose to be often confusing over syntax details (and I read it when I knew C), especially for the newbie.
That said, it's the only C book I've ever read which explains typedef correctly. All other say just that "typedef A B;" makes B a synonym of A.
Which doesn't work as soon as you "typedef int (*pfunc_t)(void);". And I'm particularly pissed by this problem of most book.