News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by cellularmitosis on Friday December 04, 2015 @10:33PM (#10680688)
I recently threw together a hello-world clib package and a project which depends on it in order to familiarize myself with how to use it:

https://github.com/pepaslabs/hello.c

https://github.com/pepaslabs/clib-demo-helloworld

Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by paulddraper on Saturday December 05, 2015 @01:09AM (#10681071)
I don't know if this is it, but C (and C++) desperately needs a good package manager if it is to be used and continue to be used for more then a relative few "core" projects.

Java became very successful in OSS due to Maven (or perhaps the other way around...in any case, it is essential to the large, high quality OSS community today). Similarly with Node.js and npm.

Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by gravypod on Friday December 04, 2015 @10:07PM (#10680618)
Something seems a bit odd in this repo.

Should https://github.com/clibs/clib/blob/master/deps/fs/fs.c#L145-... not be using stat and not seek?

Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by hermanhermitage on Friday December 04, 2015 @11:19PM (#10680839)
fseek() is portable.
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by pcunite on Friday December 04, 2015 @08:50PM (#10680438)
The hardest part about using languages like C/C++ is people don't share. Everything seems to be a commercial offering. I'm not proposing that as right or wrong, just the way it seemed to be at the time.
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by overgard on Friday December 04, 2015 @10:21PM (#10680655)
I don't know, there's quite a bit of sharing, I think a large part is that bringing in a third party library tends to be a total pain, which silos code quite a bit. In my experience, excluding header-only libraries, you usually end up spending about half a day screwing with the build system to get a library entirely integrated if your build system is moderately complex (and it will be if you're cross platform). Most of it just has to do with the design of the language(s) -- linking is very complicated, there's a lack of a good module system, conventions range wildly, compiler support for modern things tends to be uneven, etc.

I think something that might make this project a bit more interesting would be an integration with CMake, which is becoming pretty ubiquitous.

Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by xamuel on Friday December 04, 2015 @09:43PM (#10680566)
I think part of this is because C naturally lends itself to a DIY philosophy. Part of the point of C is the ability to choose the specific details, it's very much opposed to the "do it for me, I don't care what data structures you use" attitude so integral to things like npm.
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by yo-code-sucks on Friday December 04, 2015 @09:24PM (#10680521)
Linux is written in C, Boost is C++.
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by zump on Friday December 04, 2015 @08:25PM (#10680363)
I'm using their hash and list in my project. Works fine.
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by chei0aiV on Saturday December 05, 2015 @12:27AM (#10681004)
How do you manage updates?
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by endgame on Friday December 04, 2015 @08:01PM (#10680275)
Why?
Re:clib – C Package Manager-ish by teraflop on Friday December 04, 2015 @08:04PM (#10680287)
> From my experience C libraries are scattered all over the web and discovery is relatively poor. The footprint of these libraries is usually quite large and unfocused. The goal of clibs is to provide stand-alone "micro" C libraries for developers to quickly install without coupling to large frameworks.