Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why is this happening?
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 12:11:54 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <86ldezzyx1.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <10q5046$3ec1o$2@dont-email.me> <10q523v$3e865$1@dont-email.me> <n2n05bFmg8nU2@mid.individual.net> <10q7bug$7vod$1@dont-email.me> <87bjg8wrgl.fsf@example.invalid> <CfSxR.24256$eG1.15763@fx33.iad> <86bjg72xl6.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87zf3rurp9.fsf@example.invalid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 19:11:55 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d9fa7580ab63f06b181c1510d363a99a"; logging-data="2429356"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/oXWKeMwgVDZoiKQL8e7o0dtzQqcmfzpg="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:D9oUSoavgGsqi+GOvQP0dpOix/A= sha1:b8GPsV/281Kimqct2Y5F3ElwECg=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:397388

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>
>>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Lawrence D <<E2>> ??Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2026 10:15:23 +0100, Josef M@C3{B6}llers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>      diffns += 1000000000UL;
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you write
>>>>>
>>>>>       diffns += 1_000_000_000UL;
>>>>>
>>>>> yet?
>>>>
>>>> Not in C.  C23 introduces the apostrophe as a digit separator, copied
>>>> from C++:
>>>>
>>>>      diffns += 1'000'000'000UL;
>>>
>>> Or diffns += 1000ul * 1000ul * 1000ul;
>>>
>>> or diffns += 1 * NS_PER_SEC;
>>>
>>> with
>>> #define NS_PER_SEC ((1000ul * 1000ul * 1000ul))
>>>
>>>> (I would have preferred underscores, but that would have conflicted
>>>> with C++'s user-defined literals.)
>>>
>>> Likewise, I'd prefer the underscore.
>>
>> Ditto.  And there is no reason C could have allowed both,
>> and C++ be damned.
>
> (I think you omitted a "not".)

Yes, as I explained in a followup to myself.

> Using apostrophes is IMHO far better than either allowing two
> arbitrarily distinct syntaxes or a gratuitous incompatibility
> with C++.

One, it is not an incompatibility.  It's an upward compatible
extension.

Two, it's not gratuitous.  The extension is proposed because it
provides a positive value, and I'm not the only one who thinks
so.