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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #90727

Re: Advantages of C

Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Date 2016-07-21 09:48 -0700
References (2 earlier) <nmiuog$e9j$1@dont-email.me> <87mvlehbm0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <nmjjid$tu1$1@dont-email.me> <8737n49mcg.fsf@gmail.com> <nmop5p$93s$1@dont-email.me>
Message-ID <0bb160af-d07c-4e8e-bd31-da4eee2d0467@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: Advantages of C
From jadill33@gmail.com

Show all headers | View raw

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 5:07:14 PM UTC-4, jacobnavia wrote:
> Le 20/07/2016 à 20:49, Gareth Owen a écrit :
> > jacobnavia <j...@...fr> writes:
> >
> >> Lisp spends an awful lot of time checking the arguments, what C
> >> generated code doesn't do since the types are checked at compile time.
> >
> > ... says the man who implemented an entire container library using void*
> > pointers and essentially no type checking.
> >
> If you take some time to see the CCL you will see that there is a 
> generic interface implemented with C macros, that allows you full 
> compiler type checking if you want.
> 
> See the implementation of the generic lists and others. Of course I was 
> told that C macros are primitive and ugly, and what I wanted to do was 
> impossible to do with C macros.

Hmmm, I vaguely remember seeing SGLIB before the CCL.  At least there was
some prior art to a container library that used a macro interface.

The two issues with the macro version that I can see are code "ugliness"
(depending on developer's perception of macros) and code bloat.  I'm not
sure if there exists a purely C container macro incantation that C
developers at large would accept (which at this time in the C standards
lifecycle would be a precursor to getting something that the standards
committee would debate about).  There's a lot of ingrained disdain towards
macros (and it's not without valid reasons).

For a single application, code bloat is not likely to be a problem.  You
just declare the containers for the types you need and link them in.
However, I don't think it scales well.  If you have a suite of applications
and you want to use the same containers generated using the macro interface,
you have the potential to either duplicate code in each of the applications
(e.g. app 1 and 2 uses a macro generated list of integers) or maintain some
library of a mishmash of type specific containers that cover all of your
applications.

Sounds like a maintenance nightmare to me.  The void* version, while being
less type safe, has the advantage that it can be compiled into a single
shared library and linked against all of the applications, (with a different
nightmare scenario, mixing up container types at runtime and summoning all
sorts of nasal demons).

It gets worse if there is a bug in the macro implementation.  Now I have
to rebuild every application that uses that instead of just releasing a
new shared library that contains the fix.  As an example, consider how
one would support a MSVC C Runtime library model with standard container
library support using the macro implementation.  I don't find it to be
feasible.

It's nice that you make both options available.  C++ went the "macro"
route with templates (although internally some implementations may use
void* under the hood to avoid the code bloat problem).  From my
perspective, it appears uncertain if any incarnation of a container
library (macro or void*) can grab enough of a foothold to make the
standards committee notice, especially when alternative languages with
more "mature" container implementations exist (and a large number of
people here point their finger in that direction).  If you can't win
over comp.lang.c, I don't see how the standards committee is going to
be any different.

It's great that you've contributed to the C community with your container
library.  It's a success just releasing it out there.  That's all that
you can control; the rest is just part of the adventure of seeing where it
goes.

Best regards,
John D.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 17:02 +0200
  Re: Advantages of C BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 16:16 +0100
    Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 19:13 +0200
    Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 23:56 +0530
  Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 08:17 -0700
    Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 17:38 +0200
  Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 16:48 +0100
    Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 17:58 +0200
      Re: Advantages of C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 17:27 +0100
        Re: Advantages of C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-07-18 15:19 -0400
        Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 21:49 +0100
          Re: Advantages of C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 22:06 +0100
            Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 01:11 +0100
              Re: Advantages of C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-19 01:31 +0100
                Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 02:29 +0100
                Re: Advantages of C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-07-18 21:58 -0400
          Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 16:30 -0700
            Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 02:06 +0100
              Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 19:39 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 15:29 +0100
                Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-19 07:39 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 17:19 +0100
        Re: Advantages of C luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 21:16 -0700
      Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 22:47 +0100
        Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 16:48 -0700
      Re: Advantages of C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 10:21 +1200
        Re: Advantages of C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-23 19:43 +0000
    Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 18:05 +0200
      Re: Advantages of C Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2016-07-18 21:45 +0200
        Re: Advantages of C BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 21:16 +0100
          Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 11:00 +0530
            Re: Advantages of C BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-19 11:00 +0100
              Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 10:08 +0530
        Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 23:32 +0200
          Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 16:54 -0700
            Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 01:54 +0100
              Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 20:02 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 11:26 +0530
                Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-19 01:43 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 10:33 +0530
                Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-20 01:07 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 12:53 +0530
                Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 15:33 +0100
                Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-19 08:04 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 17:35 +0100
              Re: Advantages of C Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 19:21 +0100
          Re: Advantages of C Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2016-07-20 12:05 +0200
        Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 16:51 -0700
          Re: Advantages of C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-07-23 09:24 +0000
            Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-23 02:33 -0700
      Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 22:36 +0100
        Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-19 00:00 +0200
          Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 01:46 +0100
          Re: Advantages of C Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 19:49 +0100
            Re: Advantages of C supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-20 12:02 -0700
              Re: Advantages of C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-07-20 12:32 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-07-20 13:18 -0700
              Re: Advantages of C Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 20:37 +0100
            Re: Advantages of C jadill33@gmail.com - 2016-07-20 13:06 -0700
            Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-20 23:07 +0200
              Re: Advantages of C jadill33@gmail.com - 2016-07-21 09:48 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-22 10:14 +0200
                Re: Advantages of C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-22 20:25 +1200
                Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-22 02:17 -0700
                Re: Advantages of C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-22 23:56 +1200
                Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-22 11:28 +0200
                Re: Advantages of C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-22 23:49 +1200
                Re: Advantages of C jadill33@gmail.com - 2016-07-22 06:46 -0700
        Re: Advantages of C BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 23:13 +0100
          Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-19 01:45 +0100
    Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-18 19:18 +0200
      Re: Advantages of C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 22:47 +0100
        Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-19 00:07 +0200
          Re: Advantages of C Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-07-19 00:18 +0200
            Re: Advantages of C jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-07-19 01:36 +0200
          Re: Advantages of C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-19 10:28 +1200
            Re: Advantages of C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-07-18 20:34 -0400
          Re: Advantages of C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-07-18 20:33 -0400
            Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 19:30 -0700
        Re: Advantages of C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-18 17:01 -0700
  Re: Advantages of C Udyant Wig <udyant.wig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 23:51 +0530
    Re: Advantages of C Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-07-20 09:01 -0700

csiph-web