Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 02:57:10 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>

On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:48:40 +0100, bart wrote:
>

Commas are overwhelmingly used to separate list elements in
programming languages.

>
Not just separate, but terminate.

>
I disagree.  I am in favor of optional trailing commas rather than
mandatory ones.
>

All the reasonable languages allow
trailing commas.

>
Are your sure that C Standard does not allow trailing commas?
That is, they are obviously legal in initializer lists.
All compilers that I tried reject trailing comma in function calls.
>
For example
>
void bar(int);
void foo(void) {
  bar(1,);
}
>
MSVC:
comma.c(3): error C2059:  syntax error: ')'
>
clang:
comma.c:3:9: error: expected expression
    3 |   bar(1,);
      |         ^
>
gcc:
comma.c:  In function 'foo':
comma.c:3:9: error: expected expression before ')' token
    3 |   bar(1,);
      |         ^
comma.c:3:3: error: too many arguments to function 'bar'
    3 |   bar(1,);
      |   ^~~
comma.c:1:6: note:  declared here
    1 | void bar(int);
      |      ^~~
>
But is it (rejection) really required by the Standard?  I don't know.

It is required in the sense that it is a syntax error,
and syntax errors require a diagnostic.

Trailing commas in argument lists and/or parameter lists
could be accepted as an extension, even without giving a
diagnostic as I read the C standard, but implementations
are certainly within their rights to reject them.