Re:Constexpr-8cc: Compile-time C Compiler
by marssaxman on Friday November 18, 2016 @02:42PM
(#12989503)
Oh, sure, and the void pointer thing, etc., but that's all been true from the start. From gumby's comment I got the impression that there might be some more recent trend toward abandoning C compilation, and that's what I have a hard time imagining.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Constexpr-8cc: Compile-time C Compiler
by spc476 on Friday November 18, 2016 @05:54PM
(#12990748)
For years, Microsoft's C compiler only supported C89 and would choke on C99 code (that used C99 features). That has recently changed (I'm guessing with the release of C11, which made certain C99 features optional instead of mandatory) but for a long time, it seemed that Microsoft was saying "We don't care about C."
That's basically what I mean: both the C++ and C committees have been OK with C++ not being a proper superset of C.
The reason I mentioned it is that some of the syntactic horrors of C++ could safely be thrown out the window these days.
BTW though I'm primarily still a Lisp programmer I do like C++