Comments on: C++ versus Java, or references to references versus values of references. http://blogs.foognostic.net/2008/12/cpp-versus-java-or-references-to-references-versus-values-of-references/ Seeking knowledge of foo Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:49:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: seths http://blogs.foognostic.net/2008/12/cpp-versus-java-or-references-to-references-versus-values-of-references/comment-page-1/#comment-54 seths Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:28:24 +0000 http://blogs.foognostic.net/?p=24#comment-54 <p>@someone: You might see http://blogs.foognostic.net/2008/12/resolving-to-use-cpp-in-2009/ . In short, a.) my C++ feature exposure was conservative in the name of multiple compiler compatibility and b.) I have ignored the evolution of C++ for several years while languishing in Java. So I agree with your points there.</p> <p>My intent behind the idle ramblings was just to simply contrast the basics of reference types in Java and C++. This and other feedback on this post agree that it was too sparse on details. I guess I shouldn't be so scared of the dreaded tl;dr.</p> @someone: You might see http://blogs.foognostic.net/2008/12/resolving-to-use-cpp-in-2009/ . In short, a.) my C++ feature exposure was conservative in the name of multiple compiler compatibility and b.) I have ignored the evolution of C++ for several years while languishing in Java. So I agree with your points there.

My intent behind the idle ramblings was just to simply contrast the basics of reference types in Java and C++. This and other feedback on this post agree that it was too sparse on details. I guess I shouldn’t be so scared of the dreaded tl;dr.

]]> By: someone@somewhere.com http://blogs.foognostic.net/2008/12/cpp-versus-java-or-references-to-references-versus-values-of-references/comment-page-1/#comment-53 someone@somewhere.com Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:46:18 +0000 http://blogs.foognostic.net/?p=24#comment-53 <p>You've missed several initialization possibilities for both java and c++ (not to mention the stuff the the new standard adds). What about copy and assignment? What about cloning? You've very seriously missed the on-going evolution of c++ as a language. Java pales in comparison to c++ and especially to the new c++. You can't simply ignore the way a language is being changed, you are doing your readers and the industry a grave disservice and have relegated your ramblings to irrelevance. c++ does indeed have stronger reference semantics and they are getting stronger. Anyone that would argue this point isn't qualified to argue it.</p> You’ve missed several initialization possibilities for both java and c++ (not to mention the stuff the the new standard adds). What about copy and assignment? What about cloning? You’ve very seriously missed the on-going evolution of c++ as a language. Java pales in comparison to c++ and especially to the new c++. You can’t simply ignore the way a language is being changed, you are doing your readers and the industry a grave disservice and have relegated your ramblings to irrelevance. c++ does indeed have stronger reference semantics and they are getting stronger. Anyone that would argue this point isn’t qualified to argue it.

]]>