Using 'group:comp.lang.c "C/C++"', here's one of the first hits[1] I get, from May 17, 2000 and starting off, > I'm just curious, but why is it that people in

Using 'group:comp.lang.c "C/C++"', here's one of the first hits[1] I get, from May 17, 2000 and starting off, > I'm just curious, but why is it that people in this group tend to reply with "the language C/C++ does not exist" or "C/C++ is 2, what do you mean?" https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c/c/bVBTSJ3KRrg/m/uv98HvyKbNoJ https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c/c/bVBTSJ3KRrg/m/uv98... [2] followed by 14 responses in that thread, most of which explain why that is, none defending the usage. One of the respondents is active on HN, I believe: kazinator (Kaz Kylheku). I have a local copy of the UTZOO archives, with posts from the 1980s. Out of ~30,000 posts in comp.lang.c and comp.std.c only 284 use the phrase "C/C++". Many of those are discussing specific compilers, e.g., "Zortech C/C++" (this is especially true in other newsgroups). In a quick survey I couldn't find one where people corrected the usage, but if you read those threads most people are careful to provide answers specific to C and don't often repeat "C/C++". Presumably after C and then C++ became standardized people became more vocal about treating them as distinct. [1] Results weren't sorted by date, and the first page of results spans 30 years. [2] I wish I could also include a reference ID from the headers, but Google Groups apparently no longer makes them accessible even when logged in. Google Groups Usenet support is horrible, even when searching. It's a real shame. I think Google Groups has even blacklisted comp.lang.c for spam, though almost all the spam in comp.lang.c comes from Google Groups. I've filtered out Google Groups posts from my feed for the past 10 years or so.