Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"

On 02/04/2025 12:14, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:

On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 10:57:29 +0100
bart <bc@freeuk.com> wibbled:

On 02/04/2025 06:59, Alexis wrote:

>
Thought people here might be interested in this image on Jens Gustedt's
blog, which translates section 6.2.5, "Types", of the C23 standard
into a graph of inclusions:
>
    https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2025/03/29/a-diagram-of-c23-basic-types/
>

>
So much for C being a 'simple' language.

 C should be left alone. It does what it needs to do for a systems language.
Almost no use uses it for applications any more and sophisticated processing
using complex types for example are far better done in C++.
 IMO, YMMV.
 

The C standards committee knows what C is used for.  You can be quite confident that they have heard plenty of people say that "C should be left alone", as well as other people say "We would like feature X to be standardised in C".
To those that think C should not change, the answer is obvious - implementations are not going to drop support for C90, C99, C11 or C17 just because C23 has been released.  So you can continue to use the old familiar C as much as you want.
Meanwhile, those who want the new features can use them.  While it is rare that new applications are written in C, and existing C applications will not change to newer C standards, there is plenty of other kinds of coding for which C is the most suitable (or at least most used) language.
Changes and new features are not added to the C standards just for fun, or just to annoy people - they are there because some people want them and expect that they can write better / faster / clearer / safer / easier code as a result.