Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Ian Collins Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Why C++ is vastly superior to C Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 08:57:05 +1200 Lines: 15 Message-ID: <93dhd2FlpiU6@mid.individual.net> References: <4dd1872c$0$31208$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net 8WIG57JroCraslV6iehicAgH/VrhepO4reDK6GkYbIOACsdzmG Cancel-Lock: sha1:7bcPAZB7KCEL9V3KitU8adRukKU= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20101021 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4 In-Reply-To: <4dd1872c$0$31208$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c++:5035 On 05/17/11 08:21 AM, Rui Maciel wrote: > Balog Pal wrote: > >> Quite so. Another "most important" feature was parting with "locals at >> block start", but it got into C99 in the mantime. (too bad that >> real-world C is still at C90, a decade+ after the last revision, and >> massive projects still stick to that old known bug generator. :( ) > > What do you mean by "real-world C is still at C90"? C99 compilers are by no means universal. A lot of embedded (the majority of C projects) projects are still stuck with C90 tools. -- Ian Collins