﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"><channel><title>C++博客-天行健      君子当自强而不息-随笔分类-■ C++ Program</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/category/5247.html</link><description>&lt;br&gt;【没有计划的人生是失败的 | 不善于从生活与实践中学习是失败之源 | 不懂得正确思考将毁了我们的一生 | 你的生活方式决定了你的健康 |  用正确的方法解决问题】&lt;br&gt;【积极主动地解决问题 | 用行动来明白 | 人无自尊毋宁死 | 万事必有因 | 好的习惯是成功的基石 | 最大的错误是没意识到错误 | 拖延是最坏的习惯】</description><language>zh-cn</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 22:40:59 GMT</lastBuildDate><pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 22:40:59 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title>char, string, vector的内存使用比较</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/12/22/39296.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:45:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/12/22/39296.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/39296.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/12/22/39296.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>1</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/39296.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/39296.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 测试结果：<br><br>string array:        	times - 10000     memory - 1740k     VM - 828k<br>static char array:	times - 10000     memory - 1740k     VM - 820k<br>char* array:         	times - 10000     memory - 2292k     VM - 1368k<br>string vector:     	times - 10000     memory - 1752k     VM - 828k<br>char* vector:      	times - 10000     memory - 2340k     VM - 1420k<br><br>可以看出，使用string以及vector或者静态分配数组，内存消耗是比较少的，多次new小内存导致内存消耗明显增多。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/12/22/39296.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/39296.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-12-22 19:45 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/12/22/39296.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>Why don't we rewrite the Linux kernel in C++?</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/30/35519.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:20:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/30/35519.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/35519.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/30/35519.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/35519.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/35519.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: (ADB) Again, this has to do with practical and theoretical reasons. On the practical side, when Linux got started gcc didn't have an efficient C++ implementation, and some people would argue that even today it doesn't. Also there are many more C programmers than C++ programmers around. On theoretical grounds, examples of OS's implemented in Object Oriented languages are rare (Java-OS and Oberon System 3 come to mind), and the advantages of this approach are not quite clear cut (for OS design, th&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/30/35519.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/35519.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-10-30 15:20 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/30/35519.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++之父采访手记</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/25/35137.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:36:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/25/35137.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/35137.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/25/35137.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/35137.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/35137.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 在1998年的元旦，Bjarne   Stroustrup（C++之父）接受了IEEE《计算机》杂志记者的专访。编辑很自然的认为他会对于过去七年来使用他创建的语言进行面对对象设计做一个历史性的回顾。而在这个专访中，记者获得了更有价值的新闻，但是最后编辑决定为了整个IT产业，这个稿子不能发表，但是就像其它被砍掉的新闻，往往还是弄得路人皆知的。   <br>  <br>这一篇是当时专访的完全拷贝，没有被编辑、删改或者做过什么润色处理，也没有发布过，可能看起来不像常见的杂志文章，但这是实情。   <br>  <br>你会发现真正引人入胜的地方... ...    &nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/25/35137.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/35137.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-10-25 16:36 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/25/35137.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】你应当如何学习C++</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/23/34897.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:33:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/23/34897.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/34897.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/23/34897.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/34897.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/34897.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: Javascript是世界上最受误解的语言，其实C++何尝不是。坊间流传的错误的C++学习方法一抓就是一大把。我自己在学习C++的过程中也走了许多弯路，浪费了不少时间。<br><br>为什么会存在这么多错误认识？原因主要有三个，一是C++语言的细节太多。二是一些著名的C++书籍总在（不管有意还是无意）暗示语言细节的重要性和有趣。三是现代C++库的开发哲学必须用到一些犄角旮旯的语言细节（但注意，是库设计，不是日常编程）。这些共同塑造了C++社群的整体心态和哲学。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/23/34897.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/34897.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-10-23 00:33 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/23/34897.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】神话与谬误：争论C++前你应当知道什么</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/12/34010.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 01:43:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/12/34010.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/34010.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/12/34010.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/34010.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/34010.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 最近写了一篇关于C++0x Concepts的文章，意料之外地引起了一场小规模口水仗。回各位帖子的同时，回想这些年C++社群的大小争论，觉得有必要把一些长久以来在C++争论中出现的误解列举出来。<br><br>　　…History became legend, legend became myth …- The Lord of the Rings<br><br>　　哈雷将军的笑话想必大家都听过。一句话经口口相传，每个人都根据自己的主观意念加以润色，修补，歪曲…到最后就面目全非。<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/12/34010.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/34010.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-10-12 09:43 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/10/12/34010.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++批判（5）</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33012.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 05:27:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33012.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/33012.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33012.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/33012.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/33012.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 继承关系是一种耦合度很高的关系，它与组合及一般化（genericity）一样，提供了OO中的一种基本方法，用以将不同的软件组件组合起来。一个类的实例同时也是那个类的所有的祖先的实例。为了保证面向对象设计的有效性，我们应该保存下这种关系的一致性。在子类中的每一次重新定义都应该与在其祖先类中的最初定义进行一致性检查。子类中应该保存下其祖先类的需求。如果存在着不能被保存的需求，就说明了系统的设计有错误，或者是在系统中此处使用继承是不恰当的。由于继承是面向对象设计的基础，所以才会要求有一致性检测。C++中对于非虚拟函数重载的实现, 意味着编译器将不会为其进行一致性检测。C++并没有提供面向对象设计的这方面的保证。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33012.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/33012.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-27 13:27 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33012.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++批判（4）</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33010.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 05:24:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33010.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/33010.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33010.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/33010.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/33010.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要:  C++允许在参数类型不同的前提下重载函数。重载的函数与具有多态性的函数（即虚函数）不同处在于：调用正确的被重载函数实体是在编译期间就被决定了的；而对于具有多态性的函数来说，是通过运行期间的动态绑定来调用我们想调用的那个函数实体。多态性是通过重定义（或重写）这种方式达成的。请不要被重载 (overloading)和重写(overriding)所迷惑。重载是发生在两个或者是更多的函数具有相同的名字的情况下。区分它们的办法是通过检测它们的参数个数或者类型来实现的。重载与CLOS中的多重分发（multiple dispatching）不同，对于参数的多重分发是在运行期间多态完成的。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33010.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/33010.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-27 13:24 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/33010.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++批判（3）</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32999.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 02:59:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32999.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/32999.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32999.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/32999.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/32999.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: C++ARM中解释说type-safe linkage并不能100%的保证类型安全。既然它不那100%的保证类型安全，那么它就肯定是不安全的。统计分析显示：即便在很苛刻的情况下，C++ 出现单独的O-ring错误的可能性也只有0.3%。但我们一旦将6种这样的可能导致出错的情况联合起来放在一起，出错的几率就变得大为可观了。在软件中，我们经常能够看到一些错误的起因就是其怪异的联合。OO的一个主要目的就是要减少这种奇怪的联合出现。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32999.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/32999.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-27 10:59 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32999.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++批判（2）</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32995.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 02:32:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32995.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/32995.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32995.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/32995.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/32995.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 【P&S 94】中提到对于类型安全的检测来说有两种假设。一种是封闭式环境下的假设，此时程序中的各个部分在编译期间就能被确定，然后我们可以对于整个程序来进行类型检测。另一种是开放式环境下的假设，此时对于类型的检测是在单独的模块中进行的。对于实际开发和建立原型来说，第二种假设显得十分有效。然而，【P&S 94】中又提到，“当一种已经完成的软件产品到达了成熟期时，采用封闭式环境下的假设就可以被考虑了，因为这样可以使得一些比较高级的编译技术得以有了用武之处。只有在整个程序都被了解的情况下，我们才可能在其上面执行诸如全局寄存器分配、程序流程分析及无效代码检测等动作。”（附：【P&S 94】Jens Palsberg and Michael I. Schwartzbach, Object-Oriented Type Systems, Wiley 1994）。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32995.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/32995.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-27 10:32 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32995.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++批判（1）</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32968.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:51:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32968.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/32968.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32968.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>3</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/32968.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/32968.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 在所有对C++的批评中，虚拟函数这一部分是最复杂的。这主要是由于C++中复杂的机制所引起的。虽然本篇文章认为多态（polymorphism）是实现面向对象编程（OOP）的关键特性，但还是请你不要对此观点（即虚拟函数机制是C++中的一大败笔）感到有什么不安，继续看下去，如果你仅仅想知道一个大概的话，那么你也可以跳过此节。【译者注：建议大家还是看看这节会比较好】<br><br> 在C++中，当子类改写/重定义（override/redefine）了在父类中定义了的函数时，关键字virtual使得该函数具有了多态性，但是 virtual关键字也并不是必不可少的（只要在父类中被定义一次就行了）。编译器通过产生动态分配（dynamic dispatch）的方式来实现真正的多态函数调用。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32968.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/32968.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-27 02:51 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/27/32968.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】MFC五大批判</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/26/32907.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 06:32:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/26/32907.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/32907.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/26/32907.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/32907.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/32907.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: 算起来，我用Visual C++也有将近5年的历史了。在这期间，我也曾涉猎过Visual Basic和Delphi，但都是浅尝而止；Visual C++始终是我的主业。可是努力的成果如何呢？我用Delphi作出了十多个有规模的软件，用VB－－虽然我用在VB上的时间只有短短的两三个月－－也有两个像样的项目；然而，在我付出了最大热情和最多努力的Visual C++上面，却只作出了三个自己看得上眼的软件。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/26/32907.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/32907.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-26 14:32 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/26/32907.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item><item><title>【ZT】C++之父B. Stroustrup近期言论</title><link>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/11/32011.html</link><dc:creator>lovedday</dc:creator><author>lovedday</author><pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 06:45:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/11/32011.html</guid><wfw:comment>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/32011.html</wfw:comment><comments>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/11/32011.html#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/comments/commentRss/32011.html</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/services/trackbacks/32011.html</trackback:ping><description><![CDATA[&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 摘要: [译者按]  Bjarne Stroustrup博士，1950年出生于丹麦，先后毕业于丹麦阿鲁斯大学和英国剑桥大学，AT&T大规模程序设计研究部门负责人， AT&T、贝尔实验室和ACM成员。1979年，B. S开始开发一种语言，当时称为“C with Class”，后来演化为C++。1998年，ANSI/ISO C++标准建立，同年，B. S推出了其经典著作The C++ Programming Language的第三版。C++的标准化标志着B. S博士倾20年心血的伟大构想终于实现。但是，计算技术的发展一日千里，就在几年前人们还猜想C++最终将一统天下，然而随着Internet的爆炸性增长，类似Java、C#等新的、现代感十足的语言咄咄逼人，各种Script语言更是如雨后春笋纷纷涌现。在这种情况下，人们不禁有些惶恐不安。C++是不是已经过时了呢？其前景如何？标准C++有怎样的意义？应该如何学习？我们不妨看看B. S对这些问题的思考。以下文字是译者从Stroustrup1998年之后发表的若干文章、谈话笔记中精选出来的，由于出处不一，内容多有重复，为保持完整，亦一并译出。&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href='http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/11/32011.html'>阅读全文</a><img src ="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/aggbug/32011.html" width = "1" height = "1" /><br><br><div align=right><a style="text-decoration:none;" href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/" target="_blank">lovedday</a> 2007-09-11 14:45 <a href="http://www.cppblog.com/lovedday/archive/2007/09/11/32011.html#Feedback" target="_blank" style="text-decoration:none;">发表评论</a></div>]]></description></item></channel></rss>