Re:GCC 5.1 released
by bstamour on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @02:07PM
(#9422300)
I haven't really heard much buzz about C11 since its release. I don't mean to sound snarky (I'm really curious): does anyone really use C11 at all?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
I use C++11 and it's awesome. It's expressive like python but still maintains strict type safety. I built a (still young) curl wrapper using C++11: https://github.com/whoshuu/cpr
Edit: Misread the parent posts and thought they were referring to C++11. Today I learned C11 is a separate standard.
Isn't that C++11?
Nice looking project but unfortunately it is GPL.
Unlike Curl it self because it uses MIT like license.
Re:GCC 5.1 released
by loup-vaillant on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @05:48PM
(#9423802)
Too bad proprietary projects can't link against it. A loss for us all.
Seriously? GPL stuff can be used with any internal stuff, and almost any Free stuff. Isn't that enough? Where is the loss exactly?
Edit: okay, that wasn't the author's intention, and the consistency argument is a good one (least astonishment and all that). Still, the general argument holds.
Excellent point, I just changed the license to MIT to be consistent with curl. Thanks for catching that.
that looks like a c++ project that uses c++11 not c11
Re:GCC 5.1 released
by jbrandmeyer on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @05:43PM
(#9423780)
As an embedded programmer, I have to say that C11 atomics are a much better fit for device register access than volatile. Unfortunately, since many commercial C compilers don't even support C99 fully, I don't expect to see C11 in common use anytime soon.