C ++: prehistoric times and C-era with classes

C ++: prehistoric times and C-era with classes
C ++ prehistoric timesIn 1979, Bjarne Stroustrup, a well-known Chinese name, was called BS and started to develop the C ++ language in Bell Labs. Why should we develop a new language? This involves the author's previous experiences. At that time, BS studied development of large software with a doctorate degree in Cambridge. BS developed a simulator with Simula, but it runs slowly. BCPL runs very efficiently, but it is very low-level and has low development efficiency. So BS came up with the idea of creating a new language.
Below are some of BS's points: * after leaving Cambridge, I swear: If there is no suitable tool, I will never hit a problem. * My world view influences c ++: bs is a pragmatic, master's degree is pure mathematics and applied mathematics. Mathematics should be a tool for solving problems, and interest in computers should also be pragmatic. A long-time hobby of history, like Aristotle over Plato. * Many of c ++'s design decisions stem from my extreme dislike of forcing an individual to act in a specific way. Respect the crowd and not respect the individual. In fact, they do not respect anything. * The love of literature enhances the author's understanding that there is no hope to make decisions based on theories and logic. People always have the highest price. Different people do things in different ways. It is my favorite thing to tolerate and accept this situation. * I like doubters rather than "sincere believers". * I believe that scientists and intellectuals are responsible for ensuring that their ideas can be accepted by the public and thus be useful to society, instead of making expert playings. * The way people think is so colorful that c ++ is intentionally designed to support a variety of styles. * A programming language is only a tiny part of the world. It is important to maintain your sense of humor, c ++ is one of the many playful and joke languages.
C With class* C ++'s class is a user-defined type. Why don't we call it "type" directly? The reason for choosing class is that I don't want to invent new terms. simula's terms are quite appropriate. * Creating objects on the stack is much more efficient than creating objects on the stack. * In particle, Steve Johnson and Dennis Ritchie affirmed that C was intended to have name equivalence rather than structural equivalence. for example: struct A {intx, y ;}; struct B {intx, y ;}; defines two incompatible types A and B. I like name equivalence over structure equivalence, because I think this is the safest and clearest model. * why is this of c ++ a pointer rather than a reference? Why is this not self? At that time, c ++ had no reference mechanism, and c ++ borrowed terms from simula rather than smalltalk. * I have always been saying that people are too concerned about the syntax problem to damage the type problem.


The time in ancient legends is () A the legendary age B the Prehistoric Age c the civilized age D the Neolithic Age

B

The year when "C ++" was officially named as "C ++"

C ++ originated from C language. In 1980, Bjarne Stroustrup of Bell's lab and his colleagues began to improve and expand the C language, and introduced the concept of classes in Simula 67 (an early object-oriented language) to the C language, the improved C language is called "C with class" (C with class ). In the summer of 1983, "C with classes" was officially named as "C ++" and published for the first time in July of the same year. For details, see hi.baidu.com/...3.html.