News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments. Parent comment

Re:Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments by anitil on Monday February 10, 2025 @09:58PM (#43008435)
Oh I thought that was a C99 addition? It's been a while since I've used them.

Edit: struggling to find a source, though this GCC doc suggests it's C99 (but maybe that's only GCC?) - https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Designated-Inits.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments by AlotOfReading on Monday February 10, 2025 @10:07PM (#43008486)
It was C99. It took C++ 21 years to copy it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments by eqvinox on Tuesday February 11, 2025 @02:04AM (#43009841)
It's been the primary and most annoying interop issue for us when we have to integrate C++ code into our primarily C codebase (= build some pieces of our code in C++, which necessarily has to interact with at least our header files).

(Second place: differences in available GCC/clang compiler extensions between C and C++ [our software does not support Windows/MSVC], third place: differences in what casts are permitted/how they are done)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments by uecker on Tuesday February 11, 2025 @12:04PM (#43015219)
My number one issue are VLA parameters

int foo(int N, char buf[N]);

which I like to use because they improve warning messages, but they are not accepted in C++.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments by Cyph0n on Monday February 10, 2025 @10:07PM (#43008487)
Well, C is not the same as C++. It even says in that doc that “this extension is not implemented in C++”.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fun with C++26 reflection: Keyword Arguments by anitil on Monday February 10, 2025 @10:43PM (#43008683)
Yeah sorry in my head I assumed that it would have been adopted
[ Parent | on HN ]