>> I<br>>> don't consider C++/Java to be in a different paradigm than C, because they all use <br>>> the concept of storage that gets read and written along a timeline of programme<br>
>> steps that have to be run one after the other in the order specified by the<br>>> programmer.<br><br>Sorry, I'm no professional programmer (I don't think i'm even good at it!) but it seems like you are describing a Turing Machine, which includes every programming language. Every languages builds to ASM (or is interpreted by some interpreter built to ASM) and therefore use a storage modified over the course of the time in a specific order. What matters is how you organise your code, how you think your program. In the end, it will actually be the same - both C and C++ build to ASM. However, C++ forces you to think of objects while C doesn't: that's another way of thinking and therefore another paradigm.<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>
<br></div>
Every programming language worth being calling that way is conceived to be used in ways it has not be conceived for.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br>Well, you can write purely functionnal programs in C, but good luck with that. You can, but I don't think this is what you want to do.<br><br>>> Note that C is extremely often used for constructing interpreters for languages that >>are especially good at things that C isn't good at.<br>
<br>But you construct an interpreter for a new language instead of using C the way you would use this new language. That's how I have always seen languages: they try to help you to write programs like you think them. Every language brings you new ways of thinking programs. It seems also illogical to me to try thinking in a way which is not the one your tool does.<br>
<br>Again, I am probably wrong - I just would like to understand why.<br><br>Thanks!<br></div></div>