4 ms·
When I saw "C++17 and Rust are bad" I assumed it would be written in C89. I'm used to that kind of bad take. But it's actually written in C++. There isn't a Ma
by ReactiveJelly 6y ago
When I saw "C++17 and Rust are bad" I assumed it would be written in C89. I'm used to that kind of bad take.
But it's actually written in C++. There isn't a Makefile, just make.sh. And in there, I don't see the C++ standard specified. I'm guessing g++ defaults to C++98.
So that really makes you think. suckless means C++, but not the convenient parts like type inference. Not the safe parts like unique_ptr. A language with inheritance _and_ all of C's footguns.
What a head-scratcher. Excellent outsider art.
- cryptofistMonk 6y agoHe claims it's written in a subset of C99 that also compiles as C++
- Iv 6y agoIt feels like the universe always needs a Terry Davis
- krapp 6y agoPlease, no. This site's relationship with Terry Davis was weirdly fetishistic when he was alive, let's not make an icon out of him after his death.
- jszymborski 6y agoThey didn't say "C++17 and Rust are bad", they said "is an extremely bad choice for building long-lasting, accessible programs". That's a totally defensible statement.
- drummyfish 6y agoThere is -x c in the make.sh, but you actually got me on this, I am not sure which version of C that flag chooses. But I just tried adding -std=c99 flag and it works just fine, so it is indeed in C99.