News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The case against a C alternative. Parent comment

Re:The case against a C alternative by pjmlp on Tuesday August 09, 2022 @01:35AM (#32394509)
As of C++17 not so horrible, and C++2x versions even less so, unless one has some strange fetisch for SFINAE and tag dispatch.

Since 1993, I never saw any need to keep bothering with C other than having it imposed on me, C++ had enough C89 subset on it, if I ever miss coding like C and its warts.

Nowadays that compatibility is up to C11 subset.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The case against a C alternative by flohofwoe on Tuesday August 09, 2022 @03:35AM (#32395175)
> Nowadays that compatibility is up to C11 subset.

Not true unfortunately, the "C subset" is still stuck at something that can at best be called a fork of "C95" which was then developed into a "bastard language" that resembled C on the surface, but isn't actually C (e.g. the incomplete designated init support in C++20 is the best example of this half-assed "looks like C, but isn't actually C" philosophy).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The case against a C alternative by pjmlp on Tuesday August 09, 2022 @07:44AM (#32396559)
That is why it is called a subset, duh!
[ Parent | on HN ]