4 ms·

C/C++ is used to build the fundation of pretty much everything you use every day. I don't think a fast moving standard would be a good thing.

derleth 15y ago
> C/C++ This is specifically about the C programming language. Can we not conflate it with a different language entirely, at least in this comment thread?
- Retric 15y ago
  I was under the impression the C++ standard moves in lockstep with C so that all valid C programs should also be valid C++ programs.
  - adrianN 15y ago
    I believe that has not been true for a long time, at the very least because some things are keywords in C++ that would be valid identifiers in C.
    - Retric 15y ago
      Yea, after looking into it they don't seem to be completely compatible anymore. I have known many people to use a C++ compiler when writing C code, but it looks like that restricts you to a subset of C. They do try and stay reasonably consistent so for example Long Long moved from C to C++. And C99 has reduced some other incompatibilities by incorporating C++ features such as // comments and mixed declarations and code. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibility_of_C_and_C%2B%2B http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibility_of_C_and_C%2B%2B
      - Someone 15y ago
        "I have known many people to use a C++ compiler when writing C code, but it looks like that restricts you to a subset of C." Many C++ compilers actually are C/C++ compilers that decide what language to compile depending on command line flags and/or file name extension.
        Retric 15y ago
        Ahh, ok now that explains a lot, thanks.
  - natesm 15y ago
    That's Objective-C. int* foo = malloc(sizeof(int)); Is invalid C++.
    - chimeracoder 15y ago
      I don't really know C++ as well as I know C - could you explain? I always thought that the only real reason C++ wasn't a superset is because of the additional keywords.
      - wollw 15y ago
        C++ doesn't coerce the void* malloc returns into an int* , C does. You have to write int* foo = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int)); in C++ or the compiler gives a type error.
pwaring 15y ago
A fast moving standard is not necessarily a bad thing, provided that changes don't break backwards compatibility. In some ways, I'd like the C standard to move a bit faster, to keep up with things like multi-threading (although there's an argument to be had over whether that should be defined as part of the language or left to vendor-specific libraries).
- angersock 15y ago
  Aaaaand that's why they've added these ops. Note that it took a while (> decade) to really find out that these features were reasonable to assume support for. :)
- chimeracoder 15y ago
  > A fast moving standard is not necessarily a bad thing, provided that changes don't break backwards compatibility. Another problem is that the standard becomes irrelevant. This is a concern for HTML5, because a 'rapidly evolving' standard means that things can be added prematurely - but once something is in the standard, it can't be removed (easily). At some point, you run the risk of having more companies go the Microsoft route and just abandon the standard altogether, and either stick with an older version, or just fork it into their own new language.

derleth 15y ago

> C/C++ This is specifically about the C programming language. Can we not conflate it with a different language entirely, at least in this comment thread?

Retric 15y ago
I was under the impression the C++ standard moves in lockstep with C so that all valid C programs should also be valid C++ programs.
- adrianN 15y ago
  I believe that has not been true for a long time, at the very least because some things are keywords in C++ that would be valid identifiers in C.
  - Retric 15y ago
    Yea, after looking into it they don't seem to be completely compatible anymore. I have known many people to use a C++ compiler when writing C code, but it looks like that restricts you to a subset of C. They do try and stay reasonably consistent so for example Long Long moved from C to C++. And C99 has reduced some other incompatibilities by incorporating C++ features such as // comments and mixed declarations and code. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibility_of_C_and_C%2B%2B http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibility_of_C_and_C%2B%2B
    - Someone 15y ago
      "I have known many people to use a C++ compiler when writing C code, but it looks like that restricts you to a subset of C." Many C++ compilers actually are C/C++ compilers that decide what language to compile depending on command line flags and/or file name extension.
      - Retric 15y ago
        Ahh, ok now that explains a lot, thanks.
- natesm 15y ago
  That's Objective-C. int* foo = malloc(sizeof(int)); Is invalid C++.
  - chimeracoder 15y ago
    I don't really know C++ as well as I know C - could you explain? I always thought that the only real reason C++ wasn't a superset is because of the additional keywords.
    - wollw 15y ago
      C++ doesn't coerce the void* malloc returns into an int* , C does. You have to write int* foo = (int*)malloc(sizeof(int)); in C++ or the compiler gives a type error.

pwaring 15y ago

A fast moving standard is not necessarily a bad thing, provided that changes don't break backwards compatibility. In some ways, I'd like the C standard to move a bit faster, to keep up with things like multi-threading (although there's an argument to be had over whether that should be defined as part of the language or left to vendor-specific libraries).

angersock 15y ago
Aaaaand that's why they've added these ops. Note that it took a while (> decade) to really find out that these features were reasonable to assume support for. :)
chimeracoder 15y ago
> A fast moving standard is not necessarily a bad thing, provided that changes don't break backwards compatibility. Another problem is that the standard becomes irrelevant. This is a concern for HTML5, because a 'rapidly evolving' standard means that things can be added prematurely - but once something is in the standard, it can't be removed (easily). At some point, you run the risk of having more companies go the Microsoft route and just abandon the standard altogether, and either stick with an older version, or just fork it into their own new language.