2 ms·
There are C99 (and beyond)_ compliant compilers for windows, aren't there? Why insist on MSVC when it's not one of them? (Genuine question. I remember python
by LAC-Tech 5y ago
There are C99 (and beyond)_ compliant compilers for windows, aren't there?
Why insist on MSVC when it's not one of them?
(Genuine question. I remember python was c89 for similar reasons).
- NavinF 5y agoIt’s only recently (as in the last decade) that a drop-in replacement for MSVC’s cl.exe came along that’s ABI compatible and accepts the same CLI arguments: https://clang.llvm.org/docs/MSVCCompatibility.html https://clang.llvm.org/docs/MSVCCompatibility.html Incidentally, that’s around the same time MSVC started getting updates and became bearable.
- LAC-Tech 5y agoI still don't get it. Why is a drop in replacement for MSVC needed? There were c99 compilers for windows before clang IIRC correctly. So why weren't they used, MSVC be damned? Full disclaimer, I've only ever used C in linux systems.
- NavinF 5y agoOh there were lots of other compilers. Hardly anyone used them because they didn't work with any existing tooling and IIRC most of them didn't even let you to link the system's UI libraries due to ABI issues and unsupported __stuff in headers. Sure you could work without tooling like a caveman and you could print text to stdout using only the libc you brought with you, but most programs need to do a bit more than that.