5 ms·

Only if your entire API doesn't contain any C++.

• pjmlp 2y ago
  C is also C++, at least the C89 subset.
  • procaryote 2y ago
    it actually isn't https://www.stroustrup.com/bs_faq.html#C-is-subset https://www.stroustrup.com/bs_faq.html#C-is-subset
    • pjmlp 2y ago
      Do you usually post links without reading them? "In the strict mathematical sense, C isn't a subset of C++. There are programs that are valid C but not valid C++ and even a few ways of writing code that has a different meaning in C and C++. However, C++ supports every programming technique supported by C. Every C program can be written in essentially the same way in C++ with the same run-time and space efficiency. It is not uncommon to be able to convert tens of thousands of lines of ANSI C to C-style C++ in a few hours. Thus, C++ is as much a superset of ANSI C as ANSI C is a superset of K&R C and much as ISO C++ is a superset of C++ as it existed in 1985. Well written C tends to be legal C++ also. For example, every example in Kernighan & Ritchie: "The C Programming Language (2nd Edition)" is also a C++ program. "
      • josefx 2y ago
        > For example, every example in Kernighan & Ritchie: "The C Programming Language (2nd Edition)" is also a C++ program. " That is rather dated, they do things like explicitly cast the void* pointer returned by malloc, but point out in the appendix that ANSI C dropped the cast requirement for pointer conversions involving void, C++ does not allow implicit void conversions to this day.
        • pjmlp 2y ago
          > Well written C tends to be legal C++ also The "well written" remark is relevant. Many style guides will consider implicit void conversions not well written C. Naturally we are now on C23, and almost every C developer considers language extensions as being C, so whatever.
          • deleted 2y ago
            [deleted]
          • uecker 2y ago
            Well written idiomatic C is certainly not valid C++.
            • pjmlp 2y ago
              Depends on the beholder, however it hardly matters on the days of C23, as mentioned.
          • josefx 2y ago
            > The "well written" remark is relevant. So using casts that hid implicit int declarations for years is "well written"? > Many style guides will consider implicit void conversions not well written C. I could not find a "Many" guide, Linux Kernel and ffmpeg seem to advocate against pointless casts. > Naturally we are now on C23, So irrelevant to the creation time of ffmpeg and only applicable to intentionally non portable libraries.
      • gjvc 2y ago
        Do you usually post links without reading them? all the time -- I call it "crowd-sourcing intelligence" :-)
      • procaryote 2y ago
        I don't see your point. The thing you quote explicitly says C isn't a subset of C++. > Well written C tends to be legal C++ also and python2 can be written to be compatible with python3, but neither is a subset of the other