C-for-all: Extending C with modern safety and productivity features

Re:C-for-all: Extending C with modern safety and productivit... by parkovski on Wednesday December 04, 2019 @09:25AM (#21702375)

I don't think optimizations count as magic. It'd be entirely unreasonable for a language to not do them and they don't change the meaning of the program, undefined behavior aside.

"No magic" is meant as shorthand for "the minimal amount of magic we can reasonably expect given the history of the language and requirements for backward compatibility, and the least magic of any high level language with more than 3 users." Please don't make me do this again for the number 3.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C-for-all: Extending C with modern safety and productivit... by ernst_klim on Wednesday December 04, 2019 @10:48AM (#21703152)

> don't think optimizations count as magic

It's not about magic, you were talking about

> It's pretty much the wysiwyg of high level -> asm

which is not true until you use some ancient compiler from bell labs era. Modern C compilers emit totally unpredictable asm.

[ Parent | on HN ]