Ram Mohan wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm a novice to C++ and its kind.
> Does a person need to know C++ in order to use Visual C++ ?

Probably not; you might get some good habits from learning C++, which
you'll have to unlearn to use Visual C++.

>
> In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual C++
> is well versed in C++ too ?

No. There are too many differences between the languages, comparable to
the differences between C and C++ (I'm exaggerating, but only a little
bit ;-)
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

James Kuyper wrote:
>
> Probably not; you might get some good habits from learning C++, which
> you'll have to unlearn to use Visual C++.

Can you be more specific please? What would he have to unlearn?

> > In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual C++
> > is well versed in C++ too ?
>
> No. There are too many differences between the languages, comparable to
> the differences between C and C++ (I'm exaggerating, but only a little
> bit ;-)

Sorry James, this is really nonsense. C++ is a programming language,
yes. But Visual C++ is a product that includes a compiler for the C++
programming language (among other things like an IDE, a framework for
GUI applications, ...). It is not a (different) language!

I can agree with the "no" above, but not with your arguments for this
"no".

Guenter
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

In article: <5r28i5$6lj@lantana.singnet.com.sg>  "Ram Mohan" <mohanr@mbox2.singnet.com.sg> writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm a novice to C++ and its kind.
> Does a person need to know C++ in order to use Visual C++ ?
>
> In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual C++
> is well versed in C++ too ?

C++ is a programming language that will shortly have an international
standard definition.

Visual C++ is a development environment that includes a compiler for a
programming language that is very similar to standard C++.  It would not
be possible to use VC++ without some knowledge of C++.

Because using VC++ involves skills unrelated to C++ many experienced
VC++ users are weak on C++ (not flame bait - I've interviewed them!)

AFAIK there is currently no implementation of C++ that matches the
implending standard (although some are much closer than VC++). (Indeed,
this is not possible as the standard is currently a mixture of a draft
document, resolutions to correct it, and a few outstanding issues that
need to be addressed.)

As you are a novice, I doubt that the differences between VC++ and C++ will be
of significance to you just yet.
__
Alan Griffiths              | Senior Systems Consultant, Experian (Formerly CCN)
alan.griffiths@experian.com (agriffiths@ma.ccngroup.com, Tel. +44 115 934 4517)
(ACCU C++ SIG organiser     | <http://www.accu.org/> alan@octopull.demon.co.uk)
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

Guenter Szolderits wrote:
>
> James Kuyper wrote:
> >
> > Probably not; you might get some good habits from learning C++, which
> > you'll have to unlearn to use Visual C++.
>
> Can you be more specific please? What would he have to unlearn?
>
> > > In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual C++
> > > is well versed in C++ too ?
> >
> > No. There are too many differences between the languages, comparable to
> > the differences between C and C++ (I'm exaggerating, but only a little
> > bit ;-)
>
> Sorry James, this is really nonsense. C++ is a programming language,
> yes. But Visual C++ is a product that includes a compiler for the C++
> programming language (among other things like an IDE, a framework for
> GUI applications, ...). It is not a (different) language!
>
> I can agree with the "no" above, but not with your arguments for this
> "no".
>

I am assuming that the message was referring to Microsoft Visual C++; if
he is referring to a different implementation known as "Visual C++",
nothing I have to say is relevant.

My personal experience with MSVC is based on version 1.51. I would like
to hope it has improved; it's hard to imagine how it could possibly
change without improving. However, I have seen many messages posted in
this newsgroup and in comp.std.c by users of more current versions.
Those comments seem to confirm my older experiences, that Microsoft
cares very little about portability. In fact, it seems to be trying to
trap people into writing code that cannot be easily ported away from
MSVC.

There is not yet an official standard for C++, but I can make some
guesses about what to expect based upon the C compiler that also comes
with MSVC. A large fraction of the reference manual was filled with
MSVC-specific extensions and related explanatory material, scattered
throughout the manual. The documentation and sample code encouraged the
writing of non-portable code making use of MSVC specific extensions. It
was quite a strain to write code for MSVC that did not make use of those
extensions. The 'near', 'far', and 'huge' keywords are merely the
beginnings of the problem.

Therefore, I expect that anyone who only knows some other implementation
of C++ will have a lot of extensions to learn before he can make good
use of MSVC++. Anyone who knows only MSVC++ will have a lot of
extensions to unlearn before he can switch to a different implementation
of C++.
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

Jesper de Jong <iemand@ergens.nl> writes:

|"Visual C++ provides a number of powerful "wizards", which will create a
|"complete framework for you application. This means you don't have to
|"program the same, basic things like creating a main window etc. again for
|"each application you write (the wizard will automatically generate the code
|"for you), but of course you have to write most of the code of your
|"application yourself.

|"And for that, of course, you need knowledge of the C++ programming
|"language.

I don't quite agree. Visual C++, while technically a C++ development
environment, in reality is more C than Microsoft would care to admit.

ClassWizards etc. reduce OOP design to a mere filling-in of templated
functions. This basically reduces everything to the level of a convenient
C, where in some functions the first parameter can be left out. The
inexperienced user will never see what the deeper reasoning is for what
he or she is doing.

There is very little visual programming in Visual C++. IBM's VisualAge is
far better in this respect (conceptually, it has other flaws).

So, my advice: learn OOP design and C++ first. Then, if you have to, use
Visual C++.
--
Ronald van Loon (rvloon@xs4all.nl)

"I am waiting as fast as I can! I want patience, and I want it *NOW*!"
                                                     - Bethany J. Parkhurst
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

Ram Mohan <mohanr@mbox2.singnet.com.sg> schreef in artikel
<5r28i5$6lj@lantana.singnet.com.sg>...
> Hello,
>
> I'm a novice to C++ and its kind.
> Does a person need to know C++ in order to use Visual C++ ?

Microsoft Visual C++ is not a programming language, it is just a
development environment for developing C++ applications for Microsoft
Windows (3.1, 95, NT, CE).

> In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual
C++
> is well versed in C++ too ?

Visual C++ provides a number of powerful "wizards", which will create a
complete framework for you application. This means you don't have to
program the same, basic things like creating a main window etc. again for
each application you write (the wizard will automatically generate the code
for you), but of course you have to write most of the code of your
application yourself.

And for that, of course, you need knowledge of the C++ programming
language.

Jesper de Jong
jesper (at) xs4all.nl
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

> I'm a novice to C++ and its kind.
> Does a person need to know C++ in order to use Visual C++ ?

I wouldn't think so. If you want to learn C++ using MS-VC++ I can see no
problem with it. There are many good books for learning C++ that use Visual
C++ as the development environment.

In fact the development environment has many features that can help the
beginner, the class view has a whole host of context menus that allow you
to add classes, member functions, member variables and so on in a safe way
- i.e. you won't have to go through several compile attempts while you sort
out all your typos.

> In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual
C++
> is well versed in C++ too ?

Yes and No. If you are thorough with Visual C++ you will be well versed in
MFC (probably - if you choose to use it) and a number of Microsoft-ized
programming styles.  If you make a switch away from VC++ at a later stage,
having never seen other styles of C++ programming you may end up a little
disoriented.

My advice is to use VC++ and get a couple of good books (or more if you
prefer) - one concentrating on learning VC++ and one that is just a general
C++ book ("C++ by Example" by Greg Perry, published by Que, ISBN
1-56529-038-0, is an excelent start)

Do what you feel is right for you. And enjoy it C++ (or Visual C++) is a
great language to program in.


Colin Angus Mackay.
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

[Moderator's note: this subject no longer has much to do with C++
standardization.  Further discussion of this subject should go on
in a different newsgroup,such as one devoted to MS-Windows programming
tools.  mha]

On 24 Jul 97 02:01:53 GMT, Colin Mackay
<colin.angus.mackay@dial.pipex.com> wrote:

>> I'm a novice to C++ and its kind.
>> Does a person need to know C++ in order to use Visual C++ ?
>
>I wouldn't think so. If you want to learn C++ using MS-VC++ I can see no
>problem with it. There are many good books for learning C++ that use Visual
>C++ as the development environment.
>
>In fact the development environment has many features that can help the
>beginner, the class view has a whole host of context menus that allow you
>to add classes, member functions, member variables and so on in a safe way
>- i.e. you won't have to go through several compile attempts while you sort
>out all your typos.

 All these fancy shmancy features, when what they really need
to do is:

 1) Tell you what file and line an unresolved external exists
on.

 2) Tell you WHICH ambiguous functions it can't tell apart.

 3) Support the Standard Template Library.

 4)

>> In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual
>C++
>> is well versed in C++ too ?
>
>Yes and No. If you are thorough with Visual C++ you will be well versed in
>MFC (probably - if you choose to use it) and a number of Microsoft-ized
>programming styles.  If you make a switch away from VC++ at a later stage,
>having never seen other styles of C++ programming you may end up a little
>disoriented.

 Throw away your nice notions of OOP when using MFC. MFC is
useful, it just doesn't implement polymorphism (one of the three
OOP elements encapsulation, polymorphism and er, uh abstraction?)
the C++ way, i.e. virtual functions. Because of this, classes
derived off the same base class, say, WINDOW, are not swappable
with each other. Sure, they inherit functionality from the base
window, but they aren't substitutable, one with the other. You
can't change your mind about your code later and put a dialog
where a message box was, without recoding the surrounding area.

>My advice is to use VC++ and get a couple of good books (or more if you
>prefer) - one concentrating on learning VC++ and one that is just a general
>C++ book ("C++ by Example" by Greg Perry, published by Que, ISBN
>1-56529-038-0, is an excelent start)

 The great part about Visual C++ is the online help. If you
have the developer connection you hit a button and essentially
get everything Microsoft knows about the item you are interested
in. It beats having 20 books open on your desk at a time. And you
need it because the Win32 API is HUGE. There are thousands of
functions in there, no one can know them all.

 Walt Howard
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
]

[Moderator's note: this subject no longer has much to do with C++
standardization.  Further discussion of this subject should go on
in a different newsgroup,such as one devoted to MS-Windows programming
tools.  mha]

rvloon@motif.xs4all.nl (Ronald van Loon) wrote:

:Jesper de Jong <iemand@ergens.nl> writes:
:
:|"Visual C++ provides a number of powerful "wizards", which will create a
:|"complete framework for you application. This means you don't have to
:|"program the same, basic things like creating a main window etc. again for
:|"each application you write (the wizard will automatically generate the code
:|"for you), but of course you have to write most of the code of your
:|"application yourself.
:
:|"And for that, of course, you need knowledge of the C++ programming
:|"language.
:
:I don't quite agree. Visual C++, while technically a C++ development
:environment, in reality is more C than Microsoft would care to admit.

No, it is not more C.  Visual C++ is a C++ development environment.
It is not a language or an IDE, it is a collection of programming
tools including a C++ compiler.  The compiler is VERY C++ (being one
of the most compliant Windows compilers).  What you are refering to is
MFC.

:ClassWizards etc. reduce OOP design to a mere filling-in of templated
:functions. This basically reduces everything to the level of a convenient
:C, where in some functions the first parameter can be left out. The
:inexperienced user will never see what the deeper reasoning is for what
:he or she is doing.

MFC is definately not possible under C.  It requires the C++ langauge.
It is not (at least intellectually pure) OOP in design, but it is 100%
C++.  Nothing in the standards or in the definition of C++ states that
it is to be an OOP language, at least in entirety.

:There is very little visual programming in Visual C++. IBM's VisualAge is
:far better in this respect (conceptually, it has other flaws).

That depends on your definition of "Visual programming".

:So, my advice: learn OOP design and C++ first. Then, if you have to, use
:Visual C++.

I agree with learning OOP and C++ first, but this can be done quite
nicely with VC++.  Just don't start with the Wizards and MFC.

-----
William E. Kempf          : http://www.novia.net/~srwillrd
"Sir Willard"             : mailto:srwillrd@novia.net (home)
Knight of the Ascii Table :
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
]

[Moderator's note: this subject no longer has much to do with C++
standardization.  Further discussion of this subject should go on
in a different newsgroup,such as one devoted to MS-Windows programming
tools.  mha]

On 24 Jul 97 09:38:31 GMT, rvloon@motif.xs4all.nl (Ronald van
Loon) wrote:

>Jesper de Jong <iemand@ergens.nl> writes:
>
>|"Visual C++ provides a number of powerful "wizards", which will create a
>|"complete framework for you application. This means you don't have to
>|"program the same, basic things like creating a main window etc. again for
>|"each application you write (the wizard will automatically generate the code
>|"for you), but of course you have to write most of the code of your
>|"application yourself.
>
>|"And for that, of course, you need knowledge of the C++ programming
>|"language.
>
>I don't quite agree. Visual C++, while technically a C++ development
>environment, in reality is more C than Microsoft would care to admit.

 Uh, well, the Visual C++ compiler is as C++ as you'll get. If
you so CHOOSE to use the add-on tools, some are C oriented. The
compiler is C++, the Win32 environment is C.

 I have yet to see a Microsoft API or library that really
implements C++ polymorphism. I have yet to see a Win95/NT system
DLL that even appears to export C++ objects. I might be wrong,
but all the Microsoft system DLLs are designed to accomodate C
code so they can't use C++ linkages.

 The MFC is not polymorphic. ( abstract base classes that
implement the concept of a "window" or a "device" and derived
classes that use virtual functions to implement specialized
behaviors of particular window types). However, it does
encapsulate well and does a very good job of saving time over
coding directly to the Win32 api itself. It is well worth the
effort to learn, though, with the new things coming out like
ActiveX and COM (which I don't know much about) it may become
obsolete.

>ClassWizards etc. reduce OOP design to a mere filling-in of templated
>functions. This basically reduces everything to the level of a convenient
>C, where in some functions the first parameter can be left out. The
>inexperienced user will never see what the deeper reasoning is for what
>he or she is doing.

 Isn't that the purpose of all high-level languages? In my
opinion, a programming solution should be solved with the highest
level tool available. The lower you have to dip (for example,
using assembly language), the longer you'll be coding and
debugging.

>There is very little visual programming in Visual C++. IBM's VisualAge is
>far better in this respect (conceptually, it has other flaws).

 Agreed. Visual C++ is a misnomer. It should be called
"Automatic C++".

>So, my advice: learn OOP design and C++ first. Then, if you have to, use
>Visual C++.

 I say use whatever will get your job done. Learning OOP will
save you oodles of time, and can be used everywhere. Visual C++
will only help you with Microsoft Environments and certain types
of coding and will probably be obsolete in 5 years. But it's a
quick solution.

 OOP, and this is a strong statement, is a "terminal"
paradigm. Like the spoon or the wheel (whose basic designs are
close to perfect and mankind hasn't changed in thousands of
years) so is OOP. It's the end. It's done. Finito. In my opinion
it is a "perfect" model of programming and will be our prime
model for thousands of years hence. The only other model which
needs to be more fully explored is declarative programming
(Prolog).  OOP models the real world, Declarative models thought
processes. Both do a little of each of course.

 Uh, sorry about the trajectory I took there...

 Walt Howard
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
]

[Moderator's note: this subject no longer has much to do with C++
standardization.  Further discussion of this subject should go on
in a different newsgroup,such as one devoted to MS-Windows programming
tools.  mha]

On 24 Jul 97 02:00:50 GMT, James Kuyper <kuyper@wizard.net>
wrote:

>My personal experience with MSVC is based on version 1.51. I would like
>to hope it has improved; it's hard to imagine how it could possibly
>change without improving. However, I have seen many messages posted in
>this newsgroup and in comp.std.c by users of more current versions.
>Those comments seem to confirm my older experiences, that Microsoft
>cares very little about portability. In fact, it seems to be trying to
>trap people into writing code that cannot be easily ported away from
>MSVC.

 Agreed. When 4.2 came out they had an STL in there that was
totally broken. It didn't work. It was thrown on there as an
afterthought, probably because it "wasn't a Microsoft product and
thus sucked rocks".

 However, you can't slight them for supporting the Windows
environment which IS non-portable. That's not the fault of Visual
C++, but just the way things are.

>There is not yet an official standard for C++, but I can make some
>guesses about what to expect based upon the C compiler that also comes
>with MSVC. A large fraction of the reference manual was filled with
>MSVC-specific extensions and related explanatory material, scattered
>throughout the manual. The documentation and sample code encouraged the
>writing of non-portable code making use of MSVC specific extensions. It
>was quite a strain to write code for MSVC that did not make use of those
>extensions. The 'near', 'far', and 'huge' keywords are merely the
>beginnings of the problem.

 Some examples would be nice so we could discuss it.

 Near and far, are gone in the 32 bit environment, and existed
on ALL 16 bit Intel platforms, not just Microsoft. Windows code
is NOT portable to any other environment, but that has nothing to
do with Visual C++.

 I'd rather have the extensions available frankly. Sometimes
C++ doesn't support something you need like "structured"
exception handling (ability to catch ALL types of hardware or
software, operating system errors ).

>Therefore, I expect that anyone who only knows some other implementation
>of C++ will have a lot of extensions to learn before he can make good
>use of MSVC++. Anyone who knows only MSVC++ will have a lot of
>extensions to unlearn before he can switch to a different implementation
>of C++.

 There does seem to be a tendency for Microsoft to capture
programmers into their environment. But that isn't a reason not
to use Visual C++ for the Windows environment.

 What does bug me is, their programmers get to use
undocumented functions and we don't. They have even crippled 32
bit DLLs so you can't just make in import library any more from a
DLL with implib.exe. It looks like they intentionally are
preventing people from looking into their DLLs. I thought that
was one of the things the Anti Trust suit was about?

 Walt Howard
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
]

James Kuyper (kuyper@wizard.net) wrote:

> I am assuming that the message was referring to Microsoft Visual C++; if
> he is referring to a different implementation known as "Visual C++",
> nothing I have to say is relevant.
>
> My personal experience with MSVC is based on version 1.51.

That's got to be at least three or more years ago. 1.5x was the last Visual
C++ version that was targeted towards old 16-bit Windows 3.x code.

Visual C++ has been generating only 32-bit code since version 2.0 (they're
at version 5.0 now, I believe). It's getting closer and closer to the draft
standard; as much as or more so than most Unix-based implementations.

They do have a bunch of vendor extensions still, but most are in the
"spirit" of the standard (they have 64-bit types, for instance, but they
are called __int64, and the like, and sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(int) ==
sizeof(long) == sizeof(void *)).

My complaints against Visual C++ are only that they have done 64-bit types
in a strange way (not that they call it __int64 .vs., say, long long, but
that their notation for 64-bit constants is unnecessarily different from
that of most Unix-based implementations (they use an "i64" suffix instead
of "LL"). And they have a bunch of other such gratuitous incompatibilities
in their "vaguely POSIX-like" runtime library, that could have been easily
avoided with just a moment's effort, and no appreciable waste of time.

--
Shankar Unni                                  shankar@chromatic.com
Chromatic Research                            (408) 752-9488
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

Hello,

I'm a novice to C++ and its kind.
Does a person need to know C++ in order to use Visual C++ ?

In other words, can I take it that a person who is thorough with Visual C++
is well versed in C++ too ?

Cheers,
Ram Mohan
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: try just posting with      ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]