News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Checked C. Parent comment

Re:Checked C by jeffybefffy519 on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @03:35PM (#34086060)
It doesnt need to get through any committees to have impact. Microsoft just has to use it (which i assume they are given they are the authors) and then its had impact.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by adastra22 on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @04:21PM (#34086568)
I don't think the comment you are replying to is talking about MSFT's Checked C?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by ryao on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @05:43PM (#34087376)
Do they still refuse to update their compiler to support any version of C beyond C89?

Unless they have changed course, it seems more likely that Microsoft will drop NT for a UNIX kernel than Microsoft would put this into their compiler. I assume that this is by Microsoft Research and work by Microsoft Research is almost never used by Microsoft. The only exception I know is Drawbridge, which they reportedly used in Azure.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by jcranmer on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:03PM (#34087555)
MSVC supports a substantial amount of C99, C11, and C17, but they don't support the features that were made optional in C11 (i.e., variable-length arrays).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by simplotek on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:30PM (#34087787)
> MSVC supports a substantial amount of C99, C11, and C17, (...)

Supporting only some features of a spec means that they do not conform with the spec.

Msvc is still stuck with C89, and it won't budge.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by jcranmer on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:33PM (#34087818)
Funny, Microsoft seems to disagree with you: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/c11-and-c17-standard-...

> For many years Visual Studio has only supported C to the extent of it being required for C++. Things are about to change now that a conformant token-based preprocessor has been added to the compiler. With the advent of two new compiler switches, /std:c11 and /std:c17, we are officially supporting the latest ISO C language standards.

> All the required features of C11 and C17 are supported.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by pjmlp on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:34PM (#34087826)
The spec has made those features optional, compliance doesn't require optional features, that is why they are optional.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by ryao on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:17PM (#34087669)
By a substantial amount, do you mean the parts that overlap with C++? I recall reading something about Microsoft only caring about C++ support, such that anything in C that is not in C++ is unlikely to ever be implemented in their compiler, despite other compilers having no issue doing this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by jcranmer on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:28PM (#34087775)
There's a few things in C that are not in C++ that MSVC added. Designated initializers and type-generic macros are two features that come to mind, and I believe MSVC also supports C99 restrict. The only non-optional C11 feature I can think of that MSVC doesn't support these days is _Atomic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by ryao on Thursday December 22, 2022 @03:02AM (#34090968)
That is an amazing change of heart on Microsoft's part.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by TazeTSchnitzel on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @06:25PM (#34087744)
No, since Visual Studio 2015 Microsoft have been making efforts to support C11 and C17.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Checked C by my123 on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @05:59PM (#34087517)
SQL Server on Linux runs on Drawbridge, with NTUM and all.
[ Parent | on HN ]