> It's 2023 - even MSVC has supported C11 and C17 for a while now. C89 is no longer a feature to advertise, it's an unhelpful constraint forcing poorer quality

> It's 2023 - even MSVC has supported C11 and C17 for a while now. C89 is no longer a feature to advertise, it's an unhelpful constraint forcing poorer quality code. Oh come on, let's not play the language police... You are entitled to your language likings, others are not. C89 is simple, straightforward, no bells and whistles, and some people like that (I do). > There's nonstandard nomenclature in "_dispose"; if the constructing function is called _create, the common pattern is to pair it with _destroy. "Nonstandard" says who? In my 20 years of C I've seen all possible combinations of _init/_create/_new/_alloc _free/_deinit/_release/_delete/_destroy/_dispose. As long as it's consistent across the codebase, it's fine. > typedefs ending with _t are reserved for standards extensions, though these days people ignore this a lot because it feels like general practice to add _t. Not really. The usual convention for _t is to differentiate between raw struct names and typedef structs, such that you know whether you have to prefix "struct" during declaration. i.e. `struct foo {}`/`typedef struct {} foo_t` > Both _select functions fall short in that they do not allow select'ing on channels + other file descriptors simultaneously. Good point