Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: technology discussion =?utf-8?Q?=E2=86=92?= does the world need a "new" C ? Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 06:26:18 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 55 Message-ID: <861q4083gl.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <20240707164747.258@kylheku.com> <877cdur1z9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <871q42qy33.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87ed82p28y.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87r0c1nzjj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <86ikxd8czu.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240710213910.00000afd@yahoo.com> <865xtc87yo.fsf@linuxsc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:26:19 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="63b2cd43183ed9f1034fa7ab191192fd"; logging-data="2613094"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18RY/CX+/BwFQ/7Y+nL3mHyXDy+4rkiCoo=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:N39e5mwBUiY9U/7jYIqzSLO+4dU= sha1:ATfoXRMLl9ksbKQ7w63O9LSXjaE= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:387058 bart writes: > On 11/07/2024 12:49, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> bart writes: >> >>> According to what people have said, C would STILL be a language that >>> passed thing by value, and never by automatic reference. >> >> First, the scheme that you outline is either dumb or disingenuous >> (or perhaps both). >> >> Second, the argument you're making is purely ad hominem: it >> isn't about what is true but about what it is people will say, or >> at least what you think they would say. >> >> Third, none of this changes the underlying reality. Whatever >> people might say about your hypothetical scenario, or whatever it >> is you think they would say, it doesn't alter the fact that in C >> all function arguments are passed by value, and not by reference. > > People don't write software based on the the precise, pedantic details > of what a language reference says, which are always to use the same > carefully selected set of terms. > > They want to write programs that do useful tasks. > > If that task calls for a function that manipulates arrays as though > they were passed by reference, then, guess what, they will use a C > function that the standard says always passes things by value. > > For that purpose, in the mind of the user, it does the same job as 'by > by reference'. That it does so by some other quirks (array decay, and > the ability to index pointers as thought they were arrays), is by the > by. > > I understand that in this newsgroup, most posters are only interested > in what the Standard says and little else, and will pounce upon any > turns of phrase, any nomenclature, that deviate even slightly from > what it says in that document. > > I also understand that this is not comp.std.c > > Meanwhile, the internet abounds with quotes like this about C: > > "When we pass the address of an array while calling a function then > this is called function call by reference." > > "Basically, in C, function parameters that are arrays are passed by > reference, by default." > > Yes, I get that such lax informality would annoy the people here. You have proven once again that your goal is not to inform but to annoy. Congratulations. Mission accomplished.