Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #20055 > unrolled thread

How would you design C's replacement?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-29 17:17 +0100
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-29 18:44 +0100
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-29 22:20 +0100
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-29 15:32 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-30 00:37 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-29 18:30 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 13:43 +1200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-29 23:45 -0400
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-29 22:12 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-30 13:06 +0100
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 08:36 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 00:17 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 01:05 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-01 07:36 -0400
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 13:39 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-01 23:06 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 18:11 -0700
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-30 21:36 +0100
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-01 00:24 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-30 17:08 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 19:15 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-05-01 03:06 +0000
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 21:18 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-01 12:14 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 16:53 +1200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 22:17 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 17:24 +1200
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 22:44 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-01 12:18 +0100
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-29 11:10 -0700
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-04-29 18:27 +0000
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-30 13:54 +0100
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-04-29 22:07 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-04-29 22:23 +0200
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-04-30 00:41 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-30 07:30 -0400
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-04-30 16:29 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-04-29 22:26 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-29 21:27 +0100
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-04-30 08:49 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-04-30 00:42 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-04-30 19:40 +0200
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-05-25 10:38 +0200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-27 10:22 +0100
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? FireXware <none@none.invalid> - 2012-04-29 14:29 -0600
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-29 17:18 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 10:56 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 08:04 -0700
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Mark Storkamp <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-29 16:37 -0500
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-04-29 22:43 +0000
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-04-30 06:41 +0200
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-30 01:33 -0500
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-30 07:26 -0400
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-04-30 13:30 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 11:44 +1200
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 22:25 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 18:23 +1200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 06:18 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-05-02 20:25 +0000
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-03 01:10 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-03 20:34 +1200
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-04-30 01:01 -0700
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-04-30 10:08 +0200
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-04-30 08:22 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-30 12:09 -0400
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-01 00:23 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-03 01:40 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-05-02 20:15 +0000
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-04-30 17:17 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-30 12:44 -0400
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-30 16:28 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-04-30 23:50 -0400
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 13:52 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 13:44 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-01 08:34 -0700
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-30 21:22 +0100
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-03 01:14 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-03 12:35 -0400
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-04 00:44 -0700
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Leo Havmøller <rtxleh@nospam.nospam> - 2012-04-30 13:39 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 11:15 +0100
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2012-05-01 06:15 -0700
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Michael Angelo Ravera <maravera@prodigy.net> - 2012-04-30 12:11 -0700
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-04-30 21:29 +0100
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-30 16:43 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 10:31 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 03:11 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 12:32 +0100
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2012-05-01 06:06 -0700
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 14:11 +0100
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2012-05-01 06:29 -0700
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 13:24 -0700
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 16:22 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 06:44 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 13:22 -0700
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-05-02 21:33 +0000
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-02 17:59 -0700
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-02 22:16 -0500
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-03 10:13 +0100
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-03 13:05 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-01 23:36 +0100
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-03 02:40 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-02 01:37 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-05-02 16:41 +0200
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-03 02:54 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-03 12:18 -0400
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-02 20:27 -0700
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-02 01:22 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Michael Angelo Ravera <maravera@prodigy.net> - 2012-05-04 00:41 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2012-05-04 08:41 +0000
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Michael Angelo Ravera <maravera@prodigy.net> - 2012-05-07 01:11 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-07 07:18 -0400
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-07 05:41 -0700
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-07 09:24 -0400
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-07 09:31 -0700
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-10 15:37 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-04 08:16 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-04 09:49 -0700
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2012-04-30 14:25 -0400
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-04-30 22:19 +0200
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-04-30 14:04 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-01 00:33 +0200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-04-30 15:43 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 10:17 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 10:15 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-01 07:12 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? lawrence.jones@siemens.com - 2012-05-01 10:41 -0400
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-01 17:39 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-01 12:46 -0400
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-30 21:41 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 00:22 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-01 15:53 -0400
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Quentin Pope <qp19433@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> - 2012-05-09 21:06 +0000
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-10 00:32 +0200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-10 10:35 +1200
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-09 16:18 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-05-10 02:45 +0000
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-10 16:18 +0100
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-11 03:21 -0500
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-05-11 15:55 +0000
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-13 17:39 +0100
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-14 00:08 -0700
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-13 21:24 +0100
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Marco <prenom_nomus@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-20 06:50 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-10 00:08 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-05-10 04:04 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-10 10:38 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-10 11:15 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 08:36 -0700
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 17:49 +0200
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-11 09:34 -0700
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 09:41 -0700
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 19:42 +0200
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-11 10:50 -0700
                          Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 20:16 +0200
                            Trigraphs (was Re: How would you design C's replacement?) Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-14 11:49 -0400
                              Re: Trigraphs (was Re: How would you design C's replacement?) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-14 12:21 -0400
                                Re: Trigraphs Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-14 09:50 -0700
                                  Re: Trigraphs James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-14 13:05 -0400
                                    Re: Trigraphs Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-14 10:24 -0700
                                      Re: Trigraphs Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-14 11:56 -0700
                                        Re: Trigraphs jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-14 21:00 +0200
                                          Re: Trigraphs Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-05-14 16:37 -0500
                                            Re: Trigraphs James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-14 17:58 -0400
                                              Re: Trigraphs Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-14 21:05 -0700
                                                Re: Trigraphs Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-17 13:19 -0700
                                          Re: Trigraphs Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-17 13:05 -0700
                                          Re: Trigraphs jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-05-17 22:04 +0000
                                        Re: Trigraphs Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-05-14 16:22 -0400
                                          Re: Trigraphs "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-14 22:05 +0100
                                            Re: Trigraphs Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2012-05-14 22:31 -0400
                                              Re: Trigraphs Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-14 21:17 -0700
                                          Re: Trigraphs Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-17 13:42 -0700
                                    Re: Trigraphs Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-14 13:33 -0700
                                      Re: Trigraphs Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-14 23:02 +0200
                                        Re: Trigraphs James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-14 17:35 -0400
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 18:49 -0700
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-05-11 18:49 +0100
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-11 20:14 +0200
                          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 18:56 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-10 11:31 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 08:38 -0700
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-05-11 09:36 -0700
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 19:12 -0700
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-14 11:56 -0400
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-14 11:34 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-05-10 20:05 +0000
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2012-05-11 06:19 +0100
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 10:33 +0100
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-30 22:38 +0000
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 17:43 +1200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-01 09:39 +0200
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 20:21 +1200
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-01 10:39 +0200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 20:47 +1200
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-01 08:10 -0400
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-01 14:37 +0200
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-01 08:17 -0400
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-01 07:48 -0400
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 13:32 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-01 23:07 +0200
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-02 18:02 +1200
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-02 14:40 +0200
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-02 10:35 -0400
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-02 16:51 +0200
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-02 11:44 -0700
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-02 17:23 -0700
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-05-03 12:14 +0200
                          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-05-03 13:38 +0200
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-03 07:28 +1200
                        Re: How would you design C's replacement? ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-05-02 13:28 -0700
                          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-03 18:44 +1200
                      Re: How would you design C's replacement? gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-05-03 00:56 -0700
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-02 16:04 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-01 17:14 -0400
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 16:10 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-02 17:52 +1200
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-02 02:37 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-02 07:29 -0400
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-01 12:19 +0100
    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Lanarcam <lanarcam1@yahoo.fr> - 2012-05-01 18:02 +0200
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 13:43 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? Lanarcam <lanarcam1@yahoo.fr> - 2012-05-01 22:52 +0200
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-01 16:12 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-01 20:59 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-02 02:09 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-03 12:08 -0400
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-03 16:05 -0700
      Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-02 02:04 -0700
        Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-02 10:36 +0100
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-02 07:36 -0400
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-02 16:21 +0100
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-03 12:26 -0400
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-03 16:08 -0700
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-05-02 16:16 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2012-05-02 19:46 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-02 12:12 -0700
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-02 20:26 +0100
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-02 12:59 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-02 14:32 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-05-02 17:09 -0700
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-03 18:45 +1200
                  Re: How would you design C's replacement? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-05-03 08:13 -0400
                    Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-04 07:18 +1200
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2012-05-13 00:15 -0400
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-03 12:22 -0400
          Re: How would you design C's replacement? nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-05-03 03:09 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-05-03 03:55 -0700
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-03 12:45 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-03 13:15 +0100
              Re: How would you design C's replacement? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-05-03 13:41 +0100
                Re: How would you design C's replacement? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-05-03 17:51 +0100
            Re: How would you design C's replacement? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-05-03 12:37 -0400

Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13  Next page →

#20572

Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>> Quentin Pope <qp19433@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> writes:
>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:19:23 +0200, jacob navia wrote:
>>>> Le 30/04/12 20:25, lawrence.jones@siemens.com a @C3{A9}crit :
>>>>> Rui Maciel<rui.maciel@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>> If you were given the task to design a replacement for the C
>>>>>> programming language intended to fix all its problems and
>>>>>> shortcomings, what would you propopose?
>>>>>
>>>>> That the person assigning the task get their head examined.  :-)
>>>> 
>>>> C is perfect?
>>>> 
>>>> Trigraphs included?
>>>> 
>>>> Now, come on...
>>>
>>> The ignorant words of someone who hasn't spent any time using a 3270 
>>> terminal.
>>
>> Surely there were better ways to address that issue.
>
> That's probably true, but I think the underlying point is valid.
> Trigraphs were made part of C to overcome an important limitation
> for a significant (undoubtedly small, but still significant) part
> of its intended audience.
[snip]

Trigraphs are an effective refutation to the claim that C is perfect.

But nobody ever made such a claim, so ...

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20590

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:

> Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>>> Quentin Pope <qp19433@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> writes:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:19:23 +0200, jacob navia wrote:
>>>>> Le 30/04/12 20:25, lawrence.jones@siemens.com a @C3{A9}crit :
>>>>>> Rui Maciel<rui.maciel@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>> If you were given the task to design a replacement for the C
>>>>>>> programming language intended to fix all its problems and
>>>>>>> shortcomings, what would you propopose?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That the person assigning the task get their head examined.  :-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> C is perfect?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Trigraphs included?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now, come on...
>>>>
>>>> The ignorant words of someone who hasn't spent any time using a 3270 
>>>> terminal.
>>>
>>> Surely there were better ways to address that issue.
>>
>> That's probably true, but I think the underlying point is valid.
>> Trigraphs were made part of C to overcome an important limitation
>> for a significant (undoubtedly small, but still significant) part
>> of its intended audience.
> [snip]
>
> Trigraphs are an effective refutation to the claim that C is perfect.
>
> But nobody ever made such a claim, so ...

So it's important to keep trigraphs in C, in case
someone ever does?

;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20598

Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:

> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>> Trigraphs are an effective refutation to the claim that C is perfect.
>>
>> But nobody ever made such a claim, so ...
>
> So it's important to keep trigraphs in C, in case
> someone ever does?

The existence of trigraphs means that no future version of C can
be perfect.  If the future version has trigraphs, then it is
marred by their presence.  If it does not have trigraphs, then it
falls short of perfection by failing to be backward compatible.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20641

Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> writes:

> Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>
>> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>>> Trigraphs are an effective refutation to the claim that C is perfect.
>>>
>>> But nobody ever made such a claim, so ...
>>
>> So it's important to keep trigraphs in C, in case
>> someone ever does?
>
> The existence of trigraphs means that no future version of C can
> be perfect.  If the future version has trigraphs, then it is
> marred by their presence.  If it does not have trigraphs, then it
> falls short of perfection by failing to be backward compatible.

That's true!  Now I am forever doomed to be closely familiar
with an imperfect programming language.  Oh wait.. maybe
the next revision will change the language so much it
will be completely unrecognizable.  So there is still hope...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20701

On 5/11/2012 10:12 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> Ben Pfaff<blp@cs.stanford.edu>  writes:
[...]
>> The existence of trigraphs means that no future version of C can
>> be perfect.  If the future version has trigraphs, then it is
>> marred by their presence.  If it does not have trigraphs, then it
>> falls short of perfection by failing to be backward compatible.
>
> That's true!  Now I am forever doomed to be closely familiar
> with an imperfect programming language.  Oh wait.. maybe
> the next revision will change the language so much it
> will be completely unrecognizable.  So there is still hope...

I know ("hope"?) you're writing tongue-in-cheek, but there really is no 
"perfect programming language", nor can there be.  At least, not "perfect" 
in everyone's eye, as you'll probably never even get a simple majority of 
programmers to agree on what their "perfect" language consists of.  (NB: 
"DWIM".)

-- 
Kenneth Brody

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20711

Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> writes:

> On 5/11/2012 10:12 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>> Ben Pfaff<blp@cs.stanford.edu>  writes:
> [...]
>>> The existence of trigraphs means that no future version of C can
>>> be perfect.  If the future version has trigraphs, then it is
>>> marred by their presence.  If it does not have trigraphs, then it
>>> falls short of perfection by failing to be backward compatible.
>>
>> That's true!  Now I am forever doomed to be closely familiar
>> with an imperfect programming language.  Oh wait.. maybe
>> the next revision will change the language so much it
>> will be completely unrecognizable.  So there is still hope...
>
> I know ("hope"?) you're writing tongue-in-cheek, but there really is
> no "perfect programming language", nor can there be.  

THERE ISN'T?????  Now things are looking really bad...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20576

In article <jnms47$gv1$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
jacob navia  <jacob@jspamsink.org> wrote:
>Trigraphs included?

Ritchie's C didn't have trigraphs.

ANSI's C didn't have trigraphs (except for ISO).

So it's just a monumental screw-up by ISO, and everyone just ignores them.

    cc --enable-trigraphs --im-serious-enable-trigraphs
	--no-i-am-not-insane

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20581

On 10/05/2012 21:05, Joe keane wrote:
>
> Ritchie's C didn't have trigraphs.
>
> ANSI's C didn't have trigraphs (except for ISO).

The first ISO C Standard was based on the first ANSI C Standard, and the 
languages defined by the two were identical; both included trigraphs, as 
have all subsequent ANSI and ISO C Standards.

> So it's just a monumental screw-up by ISO,

No, by ANSI.

> and everyone just ignores them.
>
>      cc --enable-trigraphs --im-serious-enable-trigraphs
> 	--no-i-am-not-insane

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20150

lawrence.jones@siemens.com wrote:

> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you were given the task to design a replacement for the C programming
>> language intended to fix all its problems and shortcomings, what would
>> you propopose?
> 
> That the person assigning the task get their head examined.  :-)

Why?  Do you believe that the C programming language can't be improved, 
particularly when there isn't a need to preserve backward compatibility?


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20116

In article <jnjpil$ek2$1@speranza.aioe.org>,
Rui Maciel  <rui.maciel@gmail.com> wrote:
>If you were given the task to design a replacement for the C
>programming language intended to fix all its problems and shortcomings,
>what would you propose?

I would make a language where the bitwise operators have higher
precedence than the comparison operators.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20136

On 04/30/12 04:17 AM, Rui Maciel wrote:
> If you were given the task to design a replacement for the C programming
> language intended to fix all its problems and shortcomings, what would you
> propopose?

In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto, there are a number 
of other additions to C++11 that would benefit in C without breaking 
existing code, some examples

Scoped and strongly typed enums[1], embedded compilers often enable the 
type of an enum to be selected, so may as well standardise.

Constant expressions[2] would extend the usefulness of const.

Alignment[3] another extension that may well be of more use in C (giving 
its dominance in drivers and embedded).

Narrowing prevention[4]

[1] http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#enum
[2] http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#constexpr
[3] http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#align
[4] http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#narrowing
-- 
Ian Collins

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20142

Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,

a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
simple as this

> there are a number
> of other additions to C++11 that would benefit in C without breaking
> existing code, some examples
> 
> Scoped and strongly typed enums[1], embedded compilers often enable the
> type of an enum to be selected, so may as well standardise.

yes!

> Constant expressions[2] would extend the usefulness of const.

there would be a less intrusive modification to C that could achieve
similar goal: register const declarations. Just

- make it constraint violations not to initialize them
- allow them at places where compile time constant expressions are
  allowed
- allow them in global scope

> Alignment[3] another extension that may well be of more use in C (giving
> its dominance in drivers and embedded).

this one already made it into C11

Jens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20144

On 05/ 1/12 07:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
>
> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
> simple as this

See the last couple of paragraphs of this section:

http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#auto

>> Constant expressions[2] would extend the usefulness of const.
>
> there would be a less intrusive modification to C that could achieve
> similar goal: register const declarations. Just
>
> - make it constraint violations not to initialize them
> - allow them at places where compile time constant expressions are
>    allowed
> - allow them in global scope

That's pretty much the "old" C++ usage of const, still a big improvement 
over C.

>> Alignment[3] another extension that may well be of more use in C (giving
>> its dominance in drivers and embedded).
>
> this one already made it into C11

Ah good, I missed that!

-- 
Ian Collins

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20145

Am 05/01/2012 10:21 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
> On 05/ 1/12 07:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
>>
>> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
>> simple as this
> 
> See the last couple of paragraphs of this section:
> 
> http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#auto

yes, I know all of that

first, I think that this will not easily convince the C committee

second, this is all useless complication, why the hell they didn't
invent another keyword, something like C usually does "_Auto" if it
must or even more descriptive "_Autotype"?

third, I am probably a rare animal, but I occasionally use that in
macros for which I want to be sure that they end up in function scope

>>> Constant expressions[2] would extend the usefulness of const.
>>
>> there would be a less intrusive modification to C that could achieve
>> similar goal: register const declarations. Just
>>
>> - make it constraint violations not to initialize them
>> - allow them at places where compile time constant expressions are
>>    allowed
>> - allow them in global scope
> 
> That's pretty much the "old" C++ usage of const,

not quite, such an "rvalue" wouldn't have an address

I am also not sure if it would be the same for composite types. C++'s
rules for initializing global const qualified variables always scared
me. Wasn't it that you only could initialize integer constants at the
point of declaration, and other types (even floating point) hat to be
initialized/constructed at the point of definition/instantiation.

> still a big improvement
> over C.

Jens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20146

On 05/ 1/12 08:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 10:21 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>> On 05/ 1/12 07:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>>> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
>>>
>>> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
>>> simple as this
>>
>> See the last couple of paragraphs of this section:
>>
>> http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#auto
>
> yes, I know all of that
>
> first, I think that this will not easily convince the C committee
>
> second, this is all useless complication, why the hell they didn't
> invent another keyword, something like C usually does "_Auto" if it
> must or even more descriptive "_Autotype"?

Maybe the C++ committee has a more echo-friendly recycling policy!  They 
definitely have better aesthetic sense.

> third, I am probably a rare animal, but I occasionally use that in
> macros for which I want to be sure that they end up in function scope

I've never come across that use auto before.  Care to enlighten me?

>>>> Constant expressions[2] would extend the usefulness of const.
>>>
>>> there would be a less intrusive modification to C that could achieve
>>> similar goal: register const declarations. Just
>>>
>>> - make it constraint violations not to initialize them
>>> - allow them at places where compile time constant expressions are
>>>     allowed
>>> - allow them in global scope
>>
>> That's pretty much the "old" C++ usage of const,
>
> not quite, such an "rvalue" wouldn't have an address

Hence "pretty much"!

> I am also not sure if it would be the same for composite types. C++'s
> rules for initializing global const qualified variables always scared
> me. Wasn't it that you only could initialize integer constants at the
> point of declaration, and other types (even floating point) hat to be
> initialized/constructed at the point of definition/instantiation.

I think you are confusing regular constants with const static members of 
classes.

-- 
Ian Collins

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20160

On 05/01/2012 04:47 AM, Ian Collins wrote:
> On 05/ 1/12 08:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 10:21 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>> On 05/ 1/12 07:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>>>> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>>>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
...
>> third, I am probably a rare animal, but I occasionally use that in
>> macros for which I want to be sure that they end up in function scope
> 
> I've never come across that use auto before.  Care to enlighten me?

"function scope" is the wrong phrase; statement labels are the only kind
of identifier which can have function scope (6.2.1p3). What he means is
called "block scope" (6.2.1p4).

What he's referring to is the fact that the auto keyword is not
meaningful, and is therefore disallowed, in external declarations (6.9p2).
-- 
James Kuyper

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20162

Am 05/01/2012 10:47 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
> On 05/ 1/12 08:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 10:21 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>> On 05/ 1/12 07:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>>>> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>>>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
>>>>
>>>> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
>>>> simple as this
>>>
>>> See the last couple of paragraphs of this section:
>>>
>>> http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#auto
>>
>> yes, I know all of that
>>
>> first, I think that this will not easily convince the C committee
>>
>> second, this is all useless complication, why the hell they didn't
>> invent another keyword, something like C usually does "_Auto" if it
>> must or even more descriptive "_Autotype"?
> 
> Maybe the C++ committee has a more echo-friendly recycling policy!  They
> definitely have better aesthetic sense.

Admittedly the _Bool things etc are ugly. But there is a good reason
for it and usually they come with a #define in a standard header file
(such as "bool") that makes it easy to hide them behind something that
is more eye-friendly.

>> third, I am probably a rare animal, but I occasionally use that in
>> macros for which I want to be sure that they end up in function scope
> 
> I've never come across that use auto before.  Care to enlighten me?

there are cases where I declare variables inside a macro and where it
must be guaranteed that such a macro doesn't end up being used in
file scope. I then just make the fact that it is an automatic
variable explicit by prefixing it with 'auto'.

>> I am also not sure if it would be the same for composite types. C++'s
>> rules for initializing global const qualified variables always scared
>> me. Wasn't it that you only could initialize integer constants at the
>> point of declaration, and other types (even floating point) hat to be
>> initialized/constructed at the point of definition/instantiation.
> 
> I think you are confusing regular constants with const static members of
> classes.

perhaps, these complicated rules for C++ always confused me.

Suppose I'd have the following in a header file

struct toto { unsigned a; };
struct toto const totoZero = { 0 };

Would this result in multiple symbol errors when included in C++ or
not? In C it definitively would.

The way around in C is with defines

#define totoZeroInit { 0 }
#define totoZero (struct toto const)totoZeroInit

or even

#define totoZero (struct toto const)((struct toto const)totoZeroInit)

to have an rvalue. Still you'd have to be sure where to use
totoZeroInit and totoZero.

In what I proposed this would be

register struct toto const totoZero = { 0 };

and this then could be allowed in any context where a "value" of type
struct toto is required.

Jens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20161

On 05/01/2012 04:39 AM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 10:21 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>> On 05/ 1/12 07:39 PM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>>> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
>>>
>>> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
>>> simple as this
>>
>> See the last couple of paragraphs of this section:
>>
>> http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#auto
> 
> yes, I know all of that
> 
> first, I think that this will not easily convince the C committee
> 
> second, this is all useless complication, why the hell they didn't
> invent another keyword, something like C usually does "_Auto" if it
> must or even more descriptive "_Autotype"?

The purpose of using such reserved names is to avoid breaking existing
code. Since auto is already a keyword, it's not in use as a user-defined
identifier. Since it's current meaning is pointless, it's also almost
completely unused as a keyword, too. Therefore, auto and _Auto would
both be just about equally effective in avoiding breaking existing code.
It changes something that's currently an embarrassment for C, into a
useful keyword. Also, there's a policy governing both the C and C++
committees, to avoid gratuitous differences between the languages;
adopting the same new meaning for auto that C++ has adopted would remove
such a difference.

> third, I am probably a rare animal, but I occasionally use that in
> macros for which I want to be sure that they end up in function scope

I agree - that's a rare usage. It's not a sufficiently compelling use
case to justify resisting such a change.
-- 
James Kuyper

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20159

On 05/01/2012 03:39 AM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
> 
> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
> simple as this

No, it is not that simple. Backwards compatibility is an important goal,
but it's only one of the goals the committee needs to take into
consideration. While auto technically is a C keyword, it is never
needed, and therefore is almost never used; as a practical matter the
only sense in which it is a keyword is that it's not available for use
as a user-defined identifier. As a result, there's essentially no
backwards compatibility issue. What little code there is that currently
does use 'auto' would mostly become easily identified syntax errors
under the proposed new meaning.
-- 
James Kuyper

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20183

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
> On 05/01/2012 03:39 AM, Jens Gustedt wrote:
>> Am 05/01/2012 07:43 AM, schrieb Ian Collins:
>>> In addition to my other post concerning C++'s auto,
>> 
>> a nice feature, but reusing an existing keyword is a no-go, it is
>> simple as this
>
> No, it is not that simple. Backwards compatibility is an important goal,
> but it's only one of the goals the committee needs to take into
> consideration. While auto technically is a C keyword, it is never
> needed, and therefore is almost never used; as a practical matter the
> only sense in which it is a keyword is that it's not available for use
> as a user-defined identifier. As a result, there's essentially no
> backwards compatibility issue. What little code there is that currently
> does use 'auto' would mostly become easily identified syntax errors
> under the proposed new meaning.

As I understand it, C++ introduced a new use for the "auto" keyword
*without* breaking existing uses.

(The new form of "auto" lets you declare an object without explicitly
specifying its type; the type is inferred from the initializer.)

For example:

    {
        auto int x = 42; /* old-style "auto", useless but legal */
        auto y = x;      /* new-style "auto" */
    }

It's no more problematic than C's habitual re-use of "static".

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 10 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 13  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web