In what way is C++ more "low-level"?

Keep in mind I just started actually learning C++ last night, so to you C++ programmers this will be a really stupid question.

I've been using Visual Basic 6 for the past 6 or so years, and am just getting into C++. So far, it seems like Visual Basic is capable of most of the stuff I've done so far, which is obviously very basic, as far as Win32 programming goes (cross-platform is a big enough reason to learn C++ though).

Most of the stuff in Win32 programming seems to be subclassing (since C++ doesn't come with events) and doing everything using the Windows API.

There are obviously a lot of differences, but I'm wondering in what ways is C++ more low-level than VB? Or "How low-level can you go with C++"?

I've been doing research on reading how to handle files directly, for example, audio files, and most of the examples just use the same API functions that Visual Basic would use. :confused:

Well the language instructions of the C++ language are closer to the native instructions of the chip (processor), than Visual Basic.

Many C++ developers label C++ as a mid-level language, with both the qualities of a high-level and a low-level languages.

A pretty basic example is interfacing. Software and hardware are working together. For you to communicate using whatever medium/device/ports with logic gates you will use C. You need a low level language to do this efficiently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hell-Lord

Well the language instructions of the C++ language are closer to the native instructions of the chip (processor), than Visual Basic.

Many C++ developers label C++ as a mid-level language, with both the qualities of a high-level and a low-level languages.

---

Yeah that's true about it being compiled "closer to machine code".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zynder

A pretty basic example is interfacing. Software and hardware are working together. For you to communicate using whatever medium/device/ports with logic gates you will use C. You need a low level language to do this efficiently.

---

So C is lower than C++ (that's what I figured).

I really want to get into lower-level programming, for example: making a simple multi-track audio recorder which is possible in VB but I really need low-level access to the WAV files, audio card, and also DSP effects without using DirectX.

I'm still messing around with simple console/hello world type programs right now :blush: but I'm wondering if I should be learning a different language.

These days, you cannot say one language is faster than another. With properly optimized code, you're looking at a speed difference that only a NASA computer could tell the difference between.

chem

NASA uses Python. What do you mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zynder

NASA uses Python. What do you mean?

---

lol.. I think you missed the tiny, albeit, bad joke I made :p

chem

higher level languages are easier to learn, use, and read. Basic for example lets you visually design your forms and events. Try doing that in c++ (the event part i mean). Whereas an even higher language like SQL uses almost plain english but just try to get it to do something it isn't designed to do, like get keyboard input. This is also reasonably difficult in vb (although detecting individual keypresses is easy) but in c++ this is pretty easy. C++ can do pretty much anything you want to do with it with no difference in difficulty whereas higher-languages this just isn't true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chemicalNova

lol.. I think you missed the tiny, albeit, bad joke I made :p

chem

---

lol mine is a joke as well. :D

i heard the space shuttle uses 3 commodore 64s (for redundancy)

Hm, those jokes must have went right over my head. :confused:

If I were to make a simple multi-track audio recorder with effects, which language would you recommend? C? C#? C++? :confused: :confused:

perl with a dx wrapper j/k
c++

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orwell

i heard the space shuttle uses 3 commodore 64s (for redundancy)

---

:D :bigyello: :D :bigyello: :thumb: