Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why is this happening?
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 17:42:33 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <87tstn38jq.fsf@example.invalid>
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> <86ldezzyx1.fsf@linuxsc.com> <877bqj4wh1.fsf@example.invalid> <20260407020558.000055ca@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:42:34 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c1a0ff6bd907a37b4d4b0ba219c244b5"; logging-data="2626683"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX199g/RMF58/hw5KnGOdqB36"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fHpIMV+Ytfr9bxmejk51JW4ArgM= sha1:b7dBTv8yzMt0q2SMo+P+JIx5gnM=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:397402

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
> On Mon, 06 Apr 2026 14:20:26 -0700
> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>> Your "C++ be damned" attitude is not shared by either language
>> committee (fortunately, IMHO).
>
> For C11 and C17 it was true.
> But C23 has at least two new (or old new) incompatibilities with C++:
> - VMT are again mandatory, like in C99
> - _BitInt(N)
> It sounds to me as a change of the attitude. Or may be a return to
> pre-C11 attitude.

It's always been true that C has some features that C++ doesn't.
In some cases, it's because some features are better implemented
in C++ as container classes, while C needs them to be implemented
in the core language.  Variably modified types are a good example;
for most cases where I'd use one in C, I'd probably use std::vector
in C++.  Complex types are another example.

There is a proposal to add _BitInt to a new edition of C++:
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2025/p3666r2.html

That hardly indicates a "C++ be damned" attitude.  The two committees
still coordinate fairly closely, and try to keep the two languages as
compatible as reasonably possible.

C23 uses apostrophes as digit separators because C++ does so.
I don't know why Tim thinks requiring support for both apostrophes
and underscores would be an improvement.

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */