Related
I often write codes in MATLAB/Python to test whether my algorithm is feasible (& actually works). I then need to convert the entire code into C and sometimes, in FORTRAN90.
What would be a good way to manually convert a medium sized code from one language to another?
I have tried :
Converting the entire code from one into another and then testing it.
(Sometimes, there are errors and bugs which just won't go away and the finding the source of the error becomes a problem)
Go line by line and check for consistency of outputs every few lines.
(Too time consuming)
Use converters like f2c.
(In my experience, they are extremely horrible. I link to a lot of libraries which have different function calls for C and Fortran)
Also,:
I am fairly conversant with the programming languages I deal with so I don't need manuals or reference guides for my work (i.e. I know the syntax).
I am not asking this question specifically about MATLAB and C but rather as a translation paradigm.
Regarding the size, the codes are less than 100 lines long.
I dont want to call the code of one language to another. Please don't suggest that.
Different languages call for different paradigms. You definitely don't write and design code the same way in eg. Matlab, Python, C# or C++. Even object hierarchies will change a lot depending on the language.
That said, if your code consists in a few interconnected procedures, then you may go away with a direct line by line translation (every language allow you to write two or three interconnected functions while remaining idiomatic). But this is the case only for the simplest programs.
Prototyping in a high level language and then implementing the same idea in a robust and clean way in a "production" language is a very good practice, but involves two very different things :
Prototype in whatever language you want. Test, experiment, and convince yourself that the idea works. Pay attention to the big picture, don't focus on performance but on the high level ideas. Pay also attention to difficulties that you encounter when implementing, as you'll face them again in step 2.
Implement from scratch the idea in the production environment in language X. It will be quicker than if you did not do the prototyping stage, since most of the difficulties have been met in stage 1. Use idiomatic X, and focus on correctness. Pay attention to corner cases, general robustness, and once it works correctly, performance. You'll notice that roughly half of your code is made of new things which did not appear in 1. (eg. error checking, corner case handling, input/output, unit testing, etc).
You can see that line by line translation is obviously not a good idea, since you don't translate into the same program.
Also, when not prototyping, I find myself throwing away the first version and making another one that I like better, ie. I find myself prototyping ! Implementing the same thing twice is not a loss of time, it is normal development flow.
You may want to consider using a higher level domain specific language with multiple backends (e.g., Matlab, C, Fortran), producing clean and idiomatic code for each target language, probably with some optimisations. If your problem domain is narrow and every piece of code is more or less typical, it should be fairly trivial to design and implement such a DSL.
Break the source down into psuedo-code with input/process/output and then write your new code base to fit that spec.
I'm a relatively new C programmer, and I've noticed that many conventions from other higher-level OOP languages don't exactly hold true on C.
Is it okay to use short functions to have your coding stay organized (even though it will likely be called only once)? An example of this would be 10-15 lines in something like void init_file(void), then calling it first in main().
I would have to say, not only is it OK, but it's generally encouraged. Just don't overly fragment the train of thought by creating myriads of tiny functions. Try to ensure that each function performs a single cohesive, well... function, with a clean interface (too many parameters can be a hint that the function is performing work which is not sufficiently separate from it's caller).
Furthermore, well-named functions can serve to replace comments that would otherwise be needed. As well as providing re-use, functions can also (or instead) provide a means to organize the code and break it down into smaller units which can be more readily understood. Using functions in this way is very much like creating packages and classes/modules, though at a more fine-grained level.
Yes. Please. Don't write long functions. Write short ones that do one thing and do it well. The fact that they may only be called once is fine. One benefit is that if you name your function well, you can avoid writing comments that will get out of sync with the code over time.
If I can take the liberty to do some quoting from Code Complete:
(These reason details have been abbreviated and in spots paraphrased, for the full explanation see the complete text.)
Valid Reasons to Create a Routine
Note the reasons overlap and are not intended to be independent of each other.
Reduce complexity - The single most important reason to create a routine is to reduce a program's complexity (hide away details so you don't need to think about them).
Introduce an intermediate, understandable abstraction - Putting a section of code int o a well-named routine is one of the best ways to document its purpose.
Avoid duplicate code - The most popular reason for creating a routine. Saves space and is easier to maintain (only have to check and/or modify one place).
Hide sequences - It's a good idea to hide the order in which events happen to be processed.
Hide pointer operations - Pointer operations tend to be hard to read and error prone. Isolating them into routines shifts focus to the intent of the operation instead of the mechanics of pointer manipulation.
Improve portability - Use routines to isolate nonportable capabilities.
Simplify complicated boolean tests - Putting complicated boolean tests into a function makes the code more readable because the details of the test are out of the way and a descriptive function name summarizes the purpose of the tests.
Improve performance - You can optimize the code in one place instead of several.
To ensure all routines are small? - No. With so many good reasons for putting code into a routine, this one is unnecessary. (This is the one thrown into the list to make sure you are paying attention!)
And one final quote from the text (Chapter 7: High-Quality Routines)
One of the strongest mental blocks to
creating effective routines is a
reluctance to create a simple routine
for a simple purpose. Constructing a
whole routine to contain two or three
lines of code might seem like
overkill, but experience shows how
helpful a good small routine can be.
If a group of statements can be thought of as a thing - then make them a function
i think it is more than OK, I would recommend it! short easy to prove correct functions with well thought out names lead to code which is more self documenting than long complex functions.
Any compiler worth using will be able to inline these calls to generate efficient code if needed.
Functions are absolutely necessary to stay organized. You need to first design the problem, and then depending on the different functionality you need to split them into functions. Some segment of code which is used multiple times, probably needs to be written in a function.
I think first thinking about what problem you have in hand, break down the components and for each component try writing a function. When writing the function see if there are some code segment doing the same thing, then break it into a sub function, or if there is a sub module then it is also a candidate for another function. But at some time this breaking job should stop, and it depends on you. Generally, do not make many too big functions and not many too small functions.
When construction the function please consider the design to have high cohesion and low coupling.
EDIT1::
you might want to also consider separate modules. For example if you need to use a stack or queue for some application. Make it separate modules whose functions could be called from other functions. This way you can save re-coding commonly used modules by programming them as a group of functions stored separately.
Yes
I follow a few guidelines:
DRY (aka DIE)
Keep Cyclomatic Complexity low
Functions should fit in a Terminal window
Each one of these principles at some point will require that a function be broken up, although I suppose #2 could imply that two functions with straight-line code should be combined. It's somewhat more common to do what is called method extraction than actually splitting a function into a top and bottom half, because the usual reason is to extract common code to be called more than once.
#1 is quite useful as a decision aid. It's the same thing as saying, as I do, "never copy code".
#2 gives you a good reason to break up a function even if there is no repeated code. If the decision logic passes a certain complexity threshold, we break it up into more functions that make fewer decisions.
It is indeed a good practice to refactor code into functions, irrespective of the language being used. Even if your code is short, it will make it more readable.
If your function is quite short, you can consider inlining it.
IBM Publib article on inlining
I know about the existance of question such as this one and this one. Let me explain.
Afet reading Joel's article Back to Basics and seeing many similar questions on SO, I've begun to wonder what are specific examples of situations where knowing stuff like C can make you a better high level programmer.
What I want to know is if there are many examples of this. Many times, the answer to this question is something like "Knowing C gives you a better feel of what's happening under the covers" or "You need a solid foundation for your program", and these answers don't have much meaning. I want to understand the different specific ways in which you will benefit from knowing low level concepts,
Joel gave a couple of examples: Binary databases vs XML, and strings. But two examples don't really justify learning C and/or Assembly. So my question is this: What specific examples are there of knowing C making you a better high level programmer?
My experience with teaching students and working with people who only studied high-level languages is that they tend to think at a certain high level of abstraction, and they assume that "everything comes for free". They can become very competent programmers, but eventually they have to deal with some code that has performance issues and then it comes to bite them.
When you work a lot with C, you do think about memory allocation. You often think about memory layout (and cache locality if that's an issue). You understand how and why certain graphics operations just cost a lot. How efficient or inefficient certain socket behaviors are. How buffers work, etc. I feel that using the abstractions in a higher level language when you do know how it is implemented below the covers sometimes gives you "that extra secret sauce" when thinking about performance.
For example, Java has a garbage collector and you can't directly assign things to memory directly. And yet, you can make certain design choices (e.g., with custom data structures) that affect performance because of the same reasons this would be an issue in C.
Also, and more generally, I feel that it is important for a power programmer to not only know big-O notation (which most schools teach), but that in real-life applications the constant is also important (which schools try to ignore). My anecdotal experience is that people with skills in both language levels tend to have a better understanding of the constant, perhaps because of what I described above.
In addition, many higher level systems that I have seen interface with lower level libraries and infrastructures. For instance, some communications, databases or graphics libraries. Some drivers for certain devices, etc. If you are a power programmer, you may eventially have to venture out there and it helps to at least have an idea of what is going on.
Knowing low level stuff can help a lot.
To become a racing driver, you have to learn and understand the basic physics of how tyres grip the road. Anyone can learn to drive pretty fast, but you need a good understanding of the "low level" stuff (forces and friction, racing lines, fine throttle and brake control, etc) to get those last few percent of performance that will allow you to win the race.
For example, if you understand how the CPU architecture works in your computer, you can write code that works better with it (e.g. if you know you have a certain CPU cache size or a certain number of bytes in each CPU cache line, you can arrange your data structures and the way that you access them to make the best use of the cache - for example, processing many elements of an array in order is often faster than processing random elements, due to the CPU cache). If you have a multi-core computer, then understanding how low level techniques like threading work can gave huge benefits (just as not understanding the low level can lead to disaster in threading).
If you understand how Disk I/O and caching works, you can modify file operations to work well with it (e.g. if you read from one file and write to another, working on large batches of data in RAM can help reduce I/O contention between the reading and writing phases of your code, and vastly improve throughput)
If you understand how virtual functions work, you can design high-level code that uses virtual functions well. If used incorrectly they can severely hamper performance.
If you understand how drawing is handled, you can use clever tricks to improve drawing speed. e.g. You can draw a chessboard by alternately drawing 64 white and black squares. But it is often faster to draw 32 white sqares and then 32 black ones (because you only have to change the drawing colour twice instead of 64 times). But you can actually draw the whole board black, then XOR 4 stripes across the board and 4 stripes down the board in white, and this can be much faster still (2 colour changes, and only 9 rectangles to draw instead of 64). This chessboard trick teaches you a very important programming skill: Lateral thinking. By designing your algorithm well, you can often make a big difference to how well your program operates.
Understanding C, or for that matter, any low level programming language, gives you an opportunity to understand things like memory usage (i.e. why is it a bad thing to create several million heavy objects), how pointers/object references work, etc.
The problem is that as we've created ever increasing levels of abstraction, we find ourselves doing a lot of 'lego block' programming, without understanding how the legos actually function. And by having almost infinite resources, we start treating memory and resources like water, and tend to solve problems by throwing more iron at the situation.
While not limited to C, there's a tremendous benefit to working at a low level with much smaller, memory constrained systems like the Arduino or old-school 8-bit processors. It lets you experience close to the metal coding in a much more approachable package, and after spending time squeezing apps into 512K, you will find yourself applying these skills at a larger level within your day to day programming.
So the language itself is not important, but having a deeper appreciation for how all of the bits come together, and how to work effectively at a level closer to the hardware is a set of skills beneficial to any software developer.
For one, knowing C helps you understand how memory works in the OS and in other high level languages. When your C# or Java program balloons on memory usage, understanding that references (which are basically just pointers) take memory too, and understand how many of the data structures are implemented (which you get from making your own in C) helps you understand that your dictionary is reserving huge amounts of memory that aren't actually used.
For another, knowing C can help you understand how to make use of lower level operating system features. You don't need this often, but sometimes you may need memory mapped files, or to use marshalling in C#, and C will greatly help understand what you're doing when that happens.
I think C has also helped my understanding of network protocols, but I can't put my finger on specific examples. I was reading another SO question the other day where someone was complaining about how C's bit-fields are 'basically useless' and I was thinking how elegantly C bit fields represent low-level network protocols. High level languages dealing with structures of bits always end up a mess!
In general, the more you know, the better programmer you will be.
However, sometimes knowing another language, such as C, can make you do the wrong thing, because there might be an assumption that is not true in a higher-level language (such as Python, or PHP). For example, one might assume that finding the length of a list might be O(N) where N is the length of the list. However, this is probably not the case in many high-level language instances. In Python, for most list-like things the cost is O(1).
Knowing more about the specifics of a language will help, but knowing more in general might lead one to make incorrect assumptions.
Just "knowing" C would not make you better.
But, if you understand the whole thing, how native binaries work, how does CPU work with it, what are architecture limitations, you may write a code which is easier for CPU.
For example, how L1/L2 caches affect your work, and how should you write your code to have more hits in L1/L2 caches. When working with C/C++ and doing heavy optimizations, you will have to go down to that kind of things.
It isn't so much knowing C as it is that C is closer to the bare metal than many other languages. You need to be more aware of how to allocate/deallocate memory because you have to do it yourself. Doing it yourself helps you understand the implications of many decisions that you make.
To me any language is acceptable as long as you understand how the compiler/interpreter (basically) maps your code onto the machine. It's a bit easier to do in a language that exposes this directly, but you should be able to, with a bit of reading, figure out how memory is allocated and organized, what sort of indexing patterns are more optimal than others, what constructs are more efficient for particular applications, etc.
More important, I think, is a good understanding of operating systems, memory architectures, and algorithms. If you understand how your algorithm works, why it would be better to choose one algorithm or data structure over another (e.g., HashSet vs. List), and how your code maps onto the machine, it shouldn't matter what language you are using.
This is my experience of how I learnt and taught myself programming, specifically, understanding C, this is going back to early 1990's so may be a bit antique, but the passion and the drive is important:
Learn to understand the low level principles of the computer, such as EGA/VGA programming, here's a link to the Simtel archive on the C programmer's guide to the PC.
Understanding how TSR's work
Download the whole archive of Bob Stout's snippets which is a big collection of C code that does one thing only - study them and understand it, not alone that, the collection of snippets strives to be portable.
Browse at the International Obfuscated C Code Contest (IOCCC) online, and see how the C code can be abused and understand the intracies of the language. The worst code abuse is the winner! Download the archives and study them.
Like myself, I loved the infamous Ponzo's C Tutorial which helped me immensely, unfortunately, the archive is very hard to find. If anyone knows of where to obtain them, please leave a comment and I will amend this answer to include the link. There is another one that I can remember - Coronado's [Generic?] C Tutorial, again, my memory on this one is hazy...
Look at Dr. Dobb's journal and C User Journal here - I do not know if you can still get them in print but they were a classic, can remember the feeling of holding a printed copy in my hand and tearing off home to type in the code to see what happens!
Grab an ancient copy of Turbo C v2 which I believe you can get from borland.com and just play with 16bit C programming to get a feel and mess with the pointers...sure it is ancient and old but playing with pointers on it is fine.
Understand and learn Pointers, link here to the legacy Simtel.net - a crucial link to achieving C Guru'ship for want of a better word, also you will find a host of downloads pertaining to the C programming language - I remember actually ordering the Simtel CD Archive and looking for the C stuff...
A couple of things that you have to deal directly with in C that other languages abstract away from you include explicit memory management (malloc) and dealing directly with pointers.
My girlfriend is one semester from graduating MIT (where they mainly use Java, Scheme, and Python) with a Computer Science degree, and she is currently working at a company whose codebase is in C++. For the first few days she had a difficult time understanding all the pointers/references/etc.
On the other hand, I found moving from C++ to Java very easy, because I was never confused about pass-references-by-value vs pass-by-reference.
Similarly, in C/C++ it is much more apparent that primitives are just the compiler treating the same sets of bits in different ways, as opposed to a language like Python or Ruby where everything is an object with its own distinct properties.
A simple (not entirely realistic) example to illustrate some of the advice above. Consider the seemingly harmless
while(true)
for(Iterator iter = foo.iterator(); iter.hasNext();)
bar.doSomething( iter.next() )
or the even higher level
while(true)
for(Baz b: foo)
bar.doSomething(b)
A possible problem here is that each time round the while loop a new object (the iterator) is created. If all you care about is programmer convenience, then the latter is definitely better. But if the loop has to be efficient or the machine is resource constrained then you are pretty much at the mercy of the designers of your high level language.
For example, a typical complaint for doing high-performance Java is having execution stop while garbage (such as all those allocated Iterator objects) is reclaimed. Not very good if your software is charged with tracking incoming missiles, auto-piloting a passenger jet, or just not leaving the user wondering why the GUI has stopped responding.
One possible solution (still in the higher-level language) would be to weaken the convenience of the iterator to something like
Iterator iter = new Iterator();
while(true)
for(foo.initAlreadyAllocatedIterator(iter); iter.hasNext();)
bar.doSomething(iter.next())
But this would only make sense if you had some idea about memory allocation...otherwise it just looks like a nasty API. Convenience always costs somewhere, and knowing lower-level stuff can help you identify and mitigate those costs.
I'm a web coder: I currently enjoy AS3 and deal with PHP. I own a Nintendo DS and want to give C a go.
From a higher level, what basic things/creature comforts are going to go missing?
I can't find [for... in] loops, so I assume they aren't there. It looks like I'm going to have to declare things religiously, and I assume I have no objects (which I dealt with in PHP a while ago).
Hash tables? Funny data types?
To sum it up, you'll basically get:
Typed variables
Functions
Pointers
Standard libraries
Then, you make the rest -- that may be a little too simplified, but that's a rough idea of what to face.
It can be daunting to begin with and there may be a learning curve to overcome. Here's a few speed bumps you may encounter:
String? What string?
One big thing to get used to would be strings. There is no such thing as a string in C. A string is a "null-terminated character array" (sometimes called C strings), which basically means an array of type char with the final element being a \0 (char value 0).
In memory, a char array of length 4 containing Hi! would appear as:
char[0] == 'H'
char[1] == 'i'
char[2] == '!'
char[3] == '\0'
Also, strings don't know their own length (no such things as "objects" that come for free in C), so the use of standard library call strlen would be required, which more or less is a for loop that goes through the string until it hits a \0 character. (This means it's an O(N) operation -- longer the string, longer it takes to find the length, unlike O(1) operation of most string implementation in modern languages.)
Garbage collection?
No such thing is as a garbage collector in C. In fact, you need to allocate and deallocate memory yourself:
/* Allocate enough memory for array of 10 int values. */
int* array_of_ints = malloc(sizeof(int) * 10);
/* Done with the array? Don't forget to free the memory! */
free(array_of_ints);
Failing to clean up after allocation of memory can lead to things called memory leaks which I'm sure you've heard of before.
Pointers!
And as always, when we talk about C, we can't forget about pointers. The whole concept of references to variables and dereferencing pointers can be a serious headache-inducing concept, but once you get a hang of it, it's actually not too bad.
Except for the times when you expect it to work one way, but you find out that you didn't quite understand pointers well enough and it actually does something else -- as they say, been there, done that.
Oh, and pointers are probably going to be one of the first times you'll actually see a program crash bad enough that the operating system will yell at you. A segmentation fault is not something the computer likes a lot.
Types
All variables in C will have types. C is a statically-typed language, meaning that variable types will be checked at compile time. This might take some getting used to at the beginning, but can also be seen as a good thing, as it can reduce runtime errors such as type errors where you try to assign a number to a string.
However, it is possible to perform typecasts, so it is possible to cast a int type (which are integer values) to a double type (a floating type value). However, it is not possible to try to cast an int directly to a string like char*.
So, for example, in some languages the following is allowed:
// Example of a very weakly-typed pseudolanguage with implicit typecasts:
number n = 42
string s = "answer: "
string result = s + n // Result: "answer: 42"
In C, one would have to call an itoa function to get a char* representation of an int, then use strcat to concatenate two strings.
Conclusion
Those things said, learning C coming from a higher language can be very eye-opening and probably challenging to begin with, but once you get a hang of it, it can be pretty fun to work with.
I'd recommend starting to experiment with a C compiler, and have a good book or reference.
I think many people will recommend the K&R book, which is indeed an excellent book.
At first, I didn't think recommending K&R as the first C book would be a good idea because it may be a little bit on the difficult side, but on second thought, I think it is a very comprehensive and well-written book that can be good for getting into C if you already have some programming experience.
Good luck!
Well ... You might be in for something of a culture shock. These are the 32 standard keywords in C, and that includes the basic types.
C's standard library is pretty functional (more so than people perhaps expect), but very very thin when compared to what higher-level languages give you. There is no hash table in sight, and you are correct to assume that C does not have syntactic or semantic support for objects.
It is possible to write pretty object-oriented code anyway, but you will have to jump through a few hoops, and do much more manually since the language won't help you. See for instance the GTK+ UI toolkit for an example of a well-designed object-oriented C library/API.
I'm a web coder: I currently enjoy AS3 and deal with PHP. I own a Nintendo DS and want to give C a go.
Why do you want to do C programming?
What are your reasons, what do you hope to achieve?
Is it in order to write software for the Nintendo DS?
From a higher level, what basic things/creature comforts are going to go missing?
Given your background, I think you'll personally miss the lack of dynamic typing support, in other words you will have to be very explicit in your C programs, your data must be specified with proper types, so that the compiler knows what type of data you are working with. This also applies to any sort of memory management, i.e. basically anything once you start working with data structures that are non PODs.
For example, where you would do something like this in php:
function multiply(x) {
return (x*x);
}
You would have to do something like this in C:
int multiply(int x) {
return (x*x);
}
While these may seem fairly similar, there are big differences, namely typing restrictions: the php version will also work with floating point values, while in C you would have to explicitly provide versions for different types and ranges of values (C types are constrained to certain ranges).
I can't find [for... in] loops, so assume they aren't there
in C, it looks more like the following:
int c;
for (c=0;c<=10;c++) {
// loop body
}
it looks like I'm going to have to declare things religiously
Yes, very much so - much more so, than you'll appreciate
and I assume I have no objects (which I dealt with in PHP a while ago).
correct, no objects - but OOP can still be emulated using other ways, such as function(struct obj)
Depending on your goals and motivation, I think you may find C a pretty frustrating language to start serious programming with, you may want to look into some of the related alternatives like for example Java instead.
Dynamic arrays and garbage collection. It's not built in to C so you'll need to roll your own or use a pre-existing solution.
The standard procedure is that you manage the memory yourself which might sound like something horrible but it really isn't. For example in AS3 and PHP you can create an array and forget it when you're done with it. In C you'll have to make sure to deallocate it yourself or memory will leak and bad stuff can/will happen.
You'll particularly miss automatic memory management, and semantically meaningful datatypes such as strings, tables &c. However, learning C well is quite instructive, even though you probably don't want to use it for application-level programming, so I suggest you grab a "K&R" (Kernighan and Ritchie's seminal book) and give it a go -- you'll find plenty of free libraries on the web to use and study as you proceed beyond that, though you'll have to discipline yourself to use proper memory management heuristics... happy learning!
I was just doing some research online, and it seems there's a viable possibility to use lua for developing on the "nintendo DS", this may in fact be the easiest way for someone familiar with high level languages to get started doing embedded development, without sacrificing too much HLL power and without experiencing the inevitable culture shock when migrating from a HLL to C: microlua, here are the API docs.
So you might want to give it a go, possibly using an emulator for starters.
Keep us posted!
I'm pretty sure you want to be looking at C++, not C. C++ is basically object oriented C.
What you'll REALLY miss is the ability to rapidly prototype and test changes. You can't just change a line of code and run. Even using build tools like "make" a recompile can often take several minutes. This is even worse when you consider that it's really easy to make mistakes in C/C++. On large projects I reckon I spend more time compiling than actually coding. As a long-term user of script languages this is my biggest issue with using C.
Moving directly from a higher-level language running on a machine with effectively infinite resources to a DS is going to be a challenge, and not just because of the language.
The Nintendo DS has only 4MB of RAM, a 66MHz ARM-7, no operating system, and the development libraries available (such as libnds) provide only a thin abstraction over the hardware itself.
So, in addition to having to deal with manual memory management, a simpler language with fewer creature comforts, static typing, lack of objects, and the need to run a compile step before you can see any changes, you also have to deal with memory fragmentation, a very slow CPU by modern standards, and needing to interact with the hardware directly in order to do anything useful.
Writing code for the DS, the only other option is C++. You can't use a lot of the advanced features that make C++ worthwhile on such a limited system. You'd be writing C code using a C++ compiler.
That said, it's a lot of fun. You can screw around with the hardware all you like, and there's no need to interface with the operating system, because there isn't one.
C is the next level above straight assembler and allows you to operate close to the metal. This gives power to do amazing stuff but also to easily shoot yourself in the foot!
One such example is direct memory access and the perils and wonder of pointer arithmetic. Pointers are very powerful, fast, and handy however require careful management. See this SO question for an example.
Also as mentioned by the other answerers you will have to do your own memory management. Again powerful and painful.
I would recommend studying up a good textbook and find some quality example code. The key thing is to learn the patterns that make all this stuff hang together correctly and elegantly (well, as much as possible). A good debugger will also really help and get familiar with the standard C libraries too.
You may notice your applications crashing at the drop of a hat initially but perservere as C is definitely worth at least dabbling in. You will understand some of the amazing abstractions higher level languages provide and what is really going on under the hood.
We need more homebrew developers. I am a GBA/NDS and many other embedded platform developer and hope to see that you continue with this. I would say skip to arm assembler and then back up to C or any other language you like, once you know how the processor works, languages are just syntax.
I assume your prior experience covers the programming mindset, breaking things down into bite sized chunks and then writing code to perform those chunks. Then another module that links those together and so on. Then C is just another language, a very very simple language, no need to dive into the corners of it, drive down the middle. It is a good habit to declare variables, etc, and here you will have to. The compilers will tell you when you have forgotten something. You are not going to need big concepts, big structures, language magic, this is embedded, you are resource limited, write some bytes here, read a register there, extract a bit from the data to see if a button has been pressed, write a register in response to move a sprite, etc.
I think you will find the NDS much harder than C at first, there are two processors and some infrastructure to get the simplest of working binaries. Granted there are many many examples out there as well. I generally (and still do) recommend starting with the GBA then graduate to the NDS. bite size chunks.
A lot of things from OOP is the same or almost the same in PHP and C#.
You don't play with pointers in C# (compared to C++) so I would definitely recommend going with C# if you want to play with C.
What C are you talking about?
C#
foreach(string item in itemsCollection)
{
...
}
PHP
foreach($itemsCollection as $key=>$value)
{
...
}
etc.
I like C# because it is strongly typed and your types are automatically checked while you write a code... The possibility of trying to save integer into string or vice versa is zero compared to PHP where you can save anything into anything...
I would like to know what projects cannot be done in C.
I know programming can be quicker and more intuitive in
other languages. But I would like to know what features
are missing in C that would prevent a project from being
completed well.
For example, very few web-frameworks exist in C.
C, like many other languages, is Turing Complete.
So simple answer is: none.
However, C++ Template Meta Programming meets the same criterion, so "it is possible" is not a good criterion to choose tools.
The very first C compiler?
A working solution to the halting problem
Alright, here's one: you cannot write an x86 boot sector in C. This is one of those things that has to be written in ASM.
There are none.
Different languages give you different ways to say things. For some classes of problems a given language may be more expressive and/or concise. Are there projects that you should pick something aside from C? Yes, of course. But to say you can't do it well in C is misleading. It would be better to ask which language is the best choice for the problem at hand, and are the gains worth using something unfamiliar?
Anything can be done in virtually any language.
That said there is a level of practicality. As your system's complexity increases, you need better tools to manage it.
The problems are still solvable, but you start to need more people and much more effort in design. I'm not saying other languages don't benefit from design, I'm saying that the same level and attention to detail may not be required.
Since we programmers are Human (I am at least) we have troubles in one area or another. My biggest is memory. If I can visualize my code as objects, manipulating large modules in my head becomes easier, and my brain can handle larger projects.
Of course, it's even possible to write good OO code in C, the patterns were developed in C by manually managing dispatch tables (tables of pointers with some pointers updated to point to different methods), and this is true of all programming constructs from higher languages--they can be done in any language, but...
If you were to implement objects in C, every single class you wrote would have a large amount of boilerplate overhead. If you made some form of exception handling, you would expose more boilerplate.
Higher level languages abstract this boilerplate out of your code and into the system, simplifying what you have to think about and debug (a dispatch table in C could take a lot of debugging, but in C++ it isn't going to fail because the code generated by a working compiler is going to be bug-free and hidden, you never see it).
I guess I'd say that's the biggest (only?) difference between low level and higher level languages, how much boilerplate do you hide. In the latest batch of dynamic languages, they are really into hiding loop constructs within the language, so more things look like:
directory.forEachFile(print file.name); // Not any real language
In C, even if you isolated part of the looping inside a function, setting up the function pointers and stuff would still take lines of un-obvious code that is not solving part of your primary problem.
There is not a single algorithm that cannot be written with C.
Depends on how much you want to invest (time/money/energy) to make it happen. Otherwise, I'd say there aren't any. It is just easier sometimes to use something else.
OS kernel has been written in C and everything runs over it so you can write everything in C.
Boot sector that needs ASM :-) , I don't think you meant that.