🔒 Locked

Pointer are unnifficient

Started by Andrew Nguyen Dec 31, 2001 at 8:35 PM 29 replies 1k views

Original Post

Dec 31, 2001 at 8:35 PM

All BCPL/ALGOL are great. But, their is a problem with them. Pointers. They suck, are unneeded, but... the creators did not use string heavy machines, so did not find a reason to rid of pointers. Heck, in other languages, I can do what a pointer does in less code! yes, I am saying that pointers are stupid. Most of you will say that pointers are useful, but, in my opinion, they are useful because they are used to go AROUND BCPL/ALGOL based language''s limitations. In plenty of languages, I have rarely seen pointers used. But, I will say that pointers also confuse new users. They confuse and too omplicated. Now, then, my grammar may be bad, but I can still catch rebuttals. One is that ''Well, why don''t you change it yourself?'' well, I''m just stating an idea. I don''t have to do so. And for you idiots who would make fun without a good reason, please, save your crap for another topic. Now then, how do redo pointers? Rid of them.

Andrew Nguyen

Dec 31, 2001 at 8:58 PM

Do you realize that you are being very ignorant yourself.

Grellin

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:04 PM

Yep pointers are a bit confusing for new users. I personally like them, not because they are better or worse, just the way I code. So if you dont like them, dont use them, there are alternatives to using them. Happy New Year!

Grellin - CGP

EvilCrap

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:06 PM

hmmm.
i dont know what to say -mainly because im not sure what BCPL/ALGOL is.
i havent been able to make much since of your first paragraph.

yes, your enlish grammer and spelling are bad (look up: their, there, they''re).

Pointers only confuse learners if they are really new to programming.

Unless the language heavily wraps pointer stuff, there are simply too many things that cant be done (easily) without them.
Asm uses them like mad.
if a language supports pointers, then its probably intended to be an interface to low level stuff, like addresses.

Andrew Nguyen

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:13 PM

I can understand pointer to direct numbers, or characters, and if they are in a CHAR mode, BUT when you have a pointer for a pointer, that's when I get annoyed. Just put a name to a memory address and there, no other pointers needed! I find it annoying when readin code when people point to points to points! It's stupid and dumb, but I see it all the time.
EDIT:
Also, BCPL is the predesccor(sp) to B, C, C++,C*,C# an so on.
ALGOL heavilly influenced BCPL.

Edited by - Andrew Nguyen on December 31, 2001 10:15:21 PM

Oluseyi

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:15 PM

You can''t have a systems programming language without some form of memory address variable. In assembly all your data is in registers, which are memory addresses but are usually dereferenced to access the contents at those addresses. You can''t have dynamic memory allocation without pointers at the base level either.

[ GDNet Start Here | GDNet FAQ | MS RTFM | STL | Google ]
Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!

Null and Void

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:20 PM

So, Andrew, does this make you happier?

  
size_t Fish;
size_t Pointer = (size_t) &Fish
size_t PointerPointer = (size_t) &Pointer

That code should just about always work, but I''d much prefer to use pointers if I have to

.

[Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!]

mdfmKoRn

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:22 PM

I''ve always found that pointers often help me to organize my code, especially when using OOP.

----
Herb M. (mdfmKoRn)
www.sky-meyg.com
s3202@attbi.com

Andrew Nguyen

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:22 PM

Yes, but this isn''t a message to say "DONT USE POINTERS" but a post to say, "Use pointers only when needed or else people think you''re programming in perl". That was my message.

EvilCrap

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:32 PM

people do only use pointers when needed. and, it so happens, that programs need them often; the most effecient programs are goinu use pointers.

points to points are important. for instance, how do you make a dynamic array of strings without **?

Edited by - evilcrap on December 31, 2001 10:36:27 PM

Andrew Nguyen

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:36 PM

I realize that, but when an idiot puts lets say ''T'' and points it to &45, and then... H->J->D->T... that''s when I get annoyed...

clabinsky

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:47 PM

Why send things like structs all over the place when you can store them in one location and just point to them. I think you should buy a book and really try to understand when to use pointers.

Maximus

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:49 PM

Your later posts seem to contradict your thread starting post.

-----------------------
0wn 0wn 0wn your goat
gently down the pw33n

Andrew Nguyen

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:56 PM

Ahem, i''m not refering to myself but when i read code from others.

And yes, I''m just lightening my first angry post.

masonium

Dec 31, 2001 at 9:57 PM

quote:
Original post by Maximus
Your later posts seem to contradict your thread starting post.

My thoughts exactly.

quote:
Original post by Andrew Nguyen
Now then, how do redo pointers? Rid of them.

quote:
Original post by Andrew Nguyen
Yes, but this isn''t a message to say "DONT USE POINTERS" but a post to say, "Use pointers only when needed or else people think you''re programming in perl". That was my message.

If you say get rid of pointers, I interpret it as not using them. Of coures, that could be just me...

Andrew Nguyen

Dec 31, 2001 at 10:49 PM

Well, I didn''t mean the 2nd comment that badly...

TerranFury

Jan 1, 2002 at 1:40 PM

By the way, it''s "inefficient," not "unnifficient."

Shannon Barber

Jan 1, 2002 at 2:58 PM

A pointer to a pointer is called a HANDLE, I think you''ll find that you are VERY common and VERY useful. Sometimes indices are used in-place of an actual memory address, but it''s still considered a handle.

Blue*Omega

Jan 1, 2002 at 3:12 PM

Correct me if I''m wrong, but your problem with pointers seems to be that they make code confusing. Agreed, A->Z->F->WhatTheHellIsThisHereForAnyways->SomeRandomClass is what a lot of it ends up looking like, but is that the pointers fault? No! That''s the fault of the programmer who seems to enjoy writing insanly complicated code in hopes that no one else steals it. It''s kind of like that one dumb saying that everyone keeps using. "Guns don''t kill people, People kill people." Um... yeah... make up your own analogy there. I''ve used up my brain power alotment for the day. ^_^

-----------------------------

Vash the Stampede

"Love & Peace!"

granat

Jan 1, 2002 at 3:33 PM

A life without pointers would be sooo empty !!

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.