C++ is obsolete

The major problem with the C++ language is the complicated pointer syntax. In contrast to modern OOP languages like Java and C#, C++ requires pointers at many situations. A look into existing larger C++ programs shows, that pointers are used together with classes very often. Not because the programmer doesn't know how to do it better, but he is using the fast programming technique available. That means, it's not possible to program in C++ in a different way. Even the latest iteration C++20 requires that the programmer prefers “point->x” over “point.x”.

The good news is, that the pointers in C++ are making more sense, if the same technique is realized in plain C. A hello world program which is using OOP plus pointers in the C language is given next:

// main.c
//------------------------
#include "stdio.h" // wrong brackets
#include "point.c"
int main()
{
  printf("main\n");
  point_run();
}

// point.c
//------------------------
typedef struct {
  int x;
  int y;
} Point;
void set(Point* p, int x, int y) {
  printf("set\n");
  p->x=x;
  p->y=y;
};
void show(Point* p) {
  printf("show %d %d\n",p->x,p->y);
};
void point_run() {
  Point p;
  set(&p,10,5);
  show(&p);  
}

It looks very similar to a C++ program except that no dedicated class statement was needed. At the same time, the programmer is storing the sourcecode in different files and splits the overall project into smaller programs which makes it easy to maintain the code.

A look into existing C repositories at github will show, that this sort of style is used by most programmers. Sometimes not in this direct clean form because the file length is longer, and more than a single struct is given in the text. But, if the programmer likes he can program in C similar to Python.

The assumption is, that we the C language everything is fine, it's not possible to replace the provided sourcecode with something which has more performance or can be written more elegant. Even if somebody rewrites the code in C# or Python it will look the same. The core idea of Python is:

- put every class in a new file which is less than 100 lines of code

- aggregate classes to more complex classes

- comment the code, create a documentation for the API

This is in short the best practice method to create modern object oriented code. The paradox is, that the old-school C language supports this idea very well. The syntax is a bit different from normal object languages. Because the function is available globally and a method needs a pointer to a struct before the class variable can be edited. But this is only a syntax decision.

What i want to explain is, that modern languages like C++, C#, and Java have struggled in replacing C code with something which can be maintained better. That means, all the projects from the past which were created in plain C but not in C++ are future ready. Nobody will rewrite C code with something which is easier to maintain, because C is the king already.

One important reason to prefer C over C++ is because the pointers in C are making sense. In the sourcecode, the pointer is the only option to copy the struct into a function. The result is, that all the C routines will look the same. It's not possible to write the code different. This is important for newbies which need a clear advice how to create a program.

Sourcecode browser



In the screenshot the geany IDE is shown together with the sourcecode. The frame on the left is very interesting. Geany has parsed all the structs and the functions from the file. If a single file is smaller than 100 lines of code, and if geany shows very well which datatypes and functions are defined in the file, the programmer has everything he needs. It's the same sort of overview provided in object oriented languages like Python or Java.

What exactly was the problem with C, why it's not used anymore? It is used, many thousands of games at github are using the tool. The only thing what is wrong are the programming books about C++, Java and C#. They are explaining to the user, that C is outdated and the user beliefs so.