Interesting. I would have thought a C book would be more fundamental. I have not learned either C or C++ and skipped right to Rust.
Discussion
c++ is opposite of C
in what way?
structured procedural vs abstract behaviour
(I somehow lack better wording today, holidays are tough 🤪)
so more stylistic?
syntax suggar? not at all. it's about how you think.
E.g. objects doing different things bases on their (private) state. when you're never sure what the state is.
Not to mention things like inheritance and overloading. And templates. And macros (ok C or LISPs have them too).
this is where functional programming changed me. Every programming task is a data transformation task.
The only abstraction I need is an abstraction like "sequence".
so C++ is functional and C is OOP?
the other way around. but yes.
Well, I wouldn't call C functional but rather procedural.
LISPs are functional. And homoiconic as a cherry on top.
I learned programming basics on Racket in college. To this day, I think it instilled some good basic habits, though I don't think functional programming is the solution to everything.
I don't believe in silver bullet either. But functional has a nice mind shift. Where you realy start thinking about the data. Not particular algos or design or whatver is hot this year.
Btw. I don't remember if it was basic or pascal? Or I can't decide.
But C was the first language I used for serious programming (early days proprietary touch screen drivers for linux) when I was like 13.
True, but I'm more interested in programming in C++ than in C.
It's like saying Greek is more fundamental than Latin. Maybe, but I might be more personally interested in Latin.