falkman said:
If people use C++ because you can develop faster than C++, then why not just use Java or .NET?
What does your sentence mean
? Anyway, the effectiveness and purpose of your entire post is lost the moment you dragged in Java and .NET along with C (which you typoed as C++) and C++. I've never heard of any language called .NET.
Are you aware that (I've said it before and I'll say it again) majority (if not all) C++ programmers are also skilled C programmers?
It is a deliberate mischief by a set of people, that never got up to C++ skill levels, to talk about C and C++ as two vastly different languages. A small set of C features that never overlapped with C++ has since been obsoleted.
If I design my classes and yet call into C standard library inside my functions, am I a C++ programmer or a C programmer? Or if I call inline assembly inside my functions do I become a assembly programmer?
Your conclusion about stack allocation is completely wrong. Two ways.
One, it is not necessary, because you can allocate every damn object on heap as your program progresses.
Second, yes C++ allows such stack allocation within well encapsulated code blocks, because this very feature eases memory management (meaning no manual allocation/deallocation ) as the program grows in scope and complexity.
falkman said:
However, I see plenty of C programmers that do some nasty no-nos. Like those guys who link to the entire Qt because they like using the character set converter in it.
Entire Qt for a few character set conversion?
Now don't get me wrong, no offence meant here but:
1. Deliberating C, C++, Java and .NET (BTW there no such language) in single sentence and advising C++ program to use Java or .NET (whatever that is) shows you are proficient with none of the 4.
2. Restricting ourselves to C/C++. Your Qt comment is interesting. Its been 7 or 8 years since the current format of Qt came out and it does not require one to link to entire library for few functions.
For what you described QtCore is enough. I've two conclusions either you are into the profession very recently (or maybe still in college) or your professional peer group is very inexperienced.
Once you get some opportunity to work in more than a few languages, please revisit your assessment.