Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Hexadecimal float constants
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:22:09 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <lnpoe7eg72.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <ohmfqn$q4l$1@gioia.aioe.org> <593F0753.9040003@dignus.com> <b401da97-da04-bf4d-0db1-1a62098725e8@verizon.net> <27beaf10-7fcd-4323-813f-8cec20202fd7@googlegroups.com> <lnlgowg3ja.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <4996d741-d2cf-42a6-8515-02a0e954bf09@googlegroups.com> <lnefung8ui.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <NEU%A.52295$sD2.14262@fx42.am4> <lna85bg1f7.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <yxY%A.45542$9M.26288@fx18.am4>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3c5458cd01e27031549862a8458a90ae"; logging-data="3072"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18VQ1/zgjr0Nf9Z0oMuX59Z"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kM5KLh4WIsSFBHOBVykyWkxYOsM= sha1:OEKy03zj/n1zWeqFiWOzzTskVFE=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:112134

bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 13/06/2017 19:58, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
>>> A redesign however may not have a preprocessor, and probably wouldn't
>>> have octal constants like that. And, if it did want to have macro calls
>>> such as M(08) or M(7F), would find a better way of doing it.
>> 
>> Any such "redesign" would have to be a new language.  You can have a
>> C-like language without a preprocessor,
>
> The preprocessor excluding macro calls is not a problem (in not 
> presenting any implementation problems). That is, #include and #if/#endif.
>
> Macro processing, especially function-like macros, /is/ a problem.

#if and #include are handled by the preprocessor.

Apparently you meant to propose removing macros, not removing the
preprocessor entirely.

Even in that case, I stand by my previous statement.  I don't
believe any future C-like language that omits macros would break
tons of existing valid C code, and would not be called "C".  If you
implement such a language yourself, I encourage you to give it a
different name.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"