"Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wibbled:
On 4/4/2025 2:43 AM, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 16:01:18 -0700>
"Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wibbled:On 4/2/2025 1:09 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:On 4/2/2025 8:16 AM, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:>On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 14:12:18 -0000 (UTC)>
antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) wibbled: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++.
C99 has VMT (variable modified types). Thanks to VMT and complex types
C99 can naturaly do numeric computing that previously was done using
Fortran 77. Offical C++ has no VMT. C++ mechanizms look nicer,
Officially no, but I've never come across a C++ compiler that didn't
support
them given they're all C compilers too.
All C++ compilers are also C compilers?
To answer my own sarcastic question: No way. :^)
So name one that isn't. Fairly simple way to prove your point.
Try to compile this in a C++ compiler:
_____________
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
>
int main() {
void *p = malloc(sizeof(int));
int *ip = p;
free(p);
printf("done\n");
return 0;
}
_____________
>
$ cc -v
Apple clang version 16.0.0 (clang-1600.0.26.6)
Target: arm64-apple-darwin24.3.0
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/usr/bin
$ cc t.c
$ a.out
done
What am I missing?
You tell me mate.
| Date | Sujet | # | Auteur | |
| 23 Apr 26 |  … |
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.