Sujet : Re: is STC a good supplementary library for C?
De : bluemanedhawk (at) *nospam* invalid.invalid (Blue-Maned_Hawk)
Groupes : comp.lang.cDate : 05. Aug 2024, 18:35:52
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <pan$71096$c995f4f4$5cff75ae$e09e5907@invalid.invalid>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Pan/0.154 (Izium; 517acf4)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:05:00 -0000 (UTC), Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote:
Macros can get into the realm of unreadability, but there's an
unfortunate feedback loop here: people are told to not use macros
because they're unreadable, which means that people don't get as much
experience with macros, which means that they find it hard to read
macros ...
Macros done by manipulating strings in a preprocessor are the wrong way
to do them.
The right way to do macros is at the AST level, like Lisp does them.
Standard C preprocessors are already token-based instead of text-based
like prestandard ones were.
-- Blue-Maned_Hawk│shortens to Hawk│/blu.mɛin.dʰak/│he/him/his/himself/Mr.blue-maned_hawk.srht.siteHello. You are tired. Bye.
is STC a good supplementary library for C?
Re: is STC a good supplementary library for C?