4 ms·
The C Standard charter [pdf]
- Jorengarenar 3y agoAs you probably already know, WG14 recently finalized work on C23 and began the cycle for a new revision of the C standard, for now called C2y. Traditionally, that means updating the charter, but this time around we decided to do things a little bit differently and instead of simple update to C23 charter [1], we tried a more substantial rewrite. Initial version was uploaded on the website as document N3223 [2] and a "live" preview also is available [3]. The plan is to no longer keep charter tied to specific revision, but to have it apply to current and future standardizing efforts as a whole. What do you think? Do you like it? Is something not clear enough? Did we miss something? We would like to hear your opinions and suggestions! [1]: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2611.htm https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2611.htm [2]: https://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3223.pdf https://open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3223.pdf [3]: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQSNqWYsJPUsyigrMAHCWk07rheqmVINJdbZ8ji_KluVhwwlWi2zb6wFQJ1Oj0WMXzR8qHTnw186zLC/pub https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQSNqWYsJPUsyigr...
- thradams 3y agoI think at "Keep the language small and simple" it should say avoid "two ways of doing something" ( The sample I have is 0, NULL and nullptr where nullptr is something new. Two ways of doing something makes the language complex. )
- Jorengarenar 3y agoYeah, we didn't copy that one over precisely because it was kind of a blocker to introducing replacements for outdated design. But I think it can be weaseled into that principle. Thanks!