4 ms·
Excellent. But we could have had this years ago had Microsoft maintained an up to date and standards-compliant C library instead of promoting their insular and
by amckinlay 9y ago
Excellent. But we could have had this years ago had Microsoft maintained an up to date and standards-compliant C library instead of promoting their insular and proprietary "visual" C++ ecosystem. In fact, there probably could be a whole host of GNU/Linux software running on Windows. But no, we can't even get a complete C99 library.
- slededit 9y agoMicrosoft moved to C++ a decade ago, the C compiler exists only for backwards compatibility and generates substandard code vs the same file compiled through the C++ compiler. C features are only supported as required by the C++ standard, although I personally miss VLAs.
- pritambaral 9y agoC and C++ are not alternatives, so a platform "moving to" one doesn't mean it has to forego the other. Linux, the BSDs, macOS all have both C and C++ toolchains.
- slededit 9y agoI'm just explaining what they did. They obviously could have continued to support C if they wanted. But if your waiting for C99 support your wait is in vain. These days you can use clang so a nice C compiler has returned.