babaceca

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by babaceca 1y ago

   Reality isn't on your side. 1. A lot of people use the old C standards. 2. Not a lot of people use the new ones. 3. A lot of useful software is written in C. 4. Not a lot of useful software is written in any of the other lang
2. 2.▲
   by babaceca 1y ago

   > there might be some dependence on what you mean by "useful". I should've been clearer about that, but what I mean by that is pretty much what a normal non-technical person would consider an useful piece of software - Ph
3. 3.▲
   by babaceca 1y ago

   > So to claim that the C programmers do not want change, first you need to ignore the vast majority that do want but already dropped C... Good, we can ignore them. It's not a language for everybody, and if you're happily using
4. 4.▲
   by babaceca 1y ago

   There's no assertion required by spec. To the brain of a compiler writer UB means "the standard doesn't specify what should happen, therefore I can optimize with the assumption UB never happen." I disagree that this is h
5. 5.▲
   by babaceca 1y ago

   The vast majority of C programmers will agree that they don't care for any of the new features, as is clearly evident by the fact that almost nobody elects to use the latest standards. The "most popular programming languages"
6. 6.▲
   by babaceca 1y ago

   I've worked at both a casino company and a large mobile game studio, and the latter was way shadier in almost all aspects. There's a list of 20-ish large companies we univerally agree are evil and openly bash all the time, but the