News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016" by lultimouomo on Friday January 15, 2016 @09:23AM (#10909441)
> Because what's going to happen two years down the road when you need to get that code working on a different platform.

And what happens when the different platform handles overflow differently? Or has non-IEEE floats? Or breaks whatever assumption the C standard already makes?

Here's the thing: C is already built on assumptions, which might or might not hold for a specific platform.

Choosing which assumptions we hold true is a pragmatic choice that must be done. C does it, and does it consciously - but it doesn't mean that it nails every choice.

Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016" by GFK_of_xmaspast on Friday January 15, 2016 @01:42PM (#10911187)
If you're in a situation where you need specific implementation details of floating point arithmetic, then may the devil have mercy on your soul, because god certainly won't.
Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016" by Solarsail on Friday January 15, 2016 @03:46PM (#10912015)
Wouldn't debugging / testability imply this is a fairly large proportion of programs? Having a calculation give different results on different hardware would make testing difficult: http://yosefk.com/blog/consistency-how-to-defeat-the-purpose...
Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016" by GFK_of_xmaspast on Friday January 15, 2016 @04:01PM (#10912117)
Your own link explains how easy it is to get different results even on the same hardware depending on compiler flags.