Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: // at beginning of line |
| Date | 2011-06-03 06:57 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <isaen1$seh$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <ABbOoDBc5z5NFAmF@phaedsys.demon.co.uk> <is7nst$vr5$1@dont-email.me> <dkDZhlC+d25NFA3S@phaedsys.demon.co.uk> <94qcg5F4saU1@mid.individual.net> <UbRrOpA63J6NFAdg@phaedsys.demon.co.uk> |
On 06/03/2011 04:40 AM, Chris H wrote: > In message <94qcg5F4saU1@mid.individual.net>, Ian Collins <ian- > news@hotmail.com> writes ... >> I hope they do. Because programmers want them, several major C++ >> compilers are already offer most of the features in the upcoming C++0x >> standard. > > That is the way it should be. > > My worry is they will try and move C closer to C++. A vast amount of C > is in the embedded area on 8-128 bit systems where they don't want C++ > (4 bit systems are still used but usually in assembler) > > C and C++ are separate languages and should be kept that way. People who > want the features of C++ can use C++ not fit them to C otherwise the > vast majority of the C compilers will not follow the new standard. The most poorly supported of the new C99 features are those which moved C away from C++, not those which moved it closer, so I don't think that's as big of an issue as you suggest. In fact, the existence of compilers which can compile code as either C or C++ means that changes (to either standard) which bring C and C++ closer together tend to get adopted faster than those which do not. -- James Kuyper
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
// at beginning of line Federico <no.adress@nospam.com> - 2011-06-01 19:44 +0000
Re: // at beginning of line Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-06-01 12:48 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-06-01 19:55 +0000
Re: // at beginning of line Federico <no.adress@nospam.com> - 2011-06-01 20:46 +0000
Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-01 13:54 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Federico <no.adress@nospam.com> - 2011-06-02 19:34 +0000
Re: // at beginning of line Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-06-02 12:38 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-02 13:13 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-06-01 20:59 +0000
Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-01 12:56 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-06-01 23:06 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-06-02 07:15 +0000
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-02 08:40 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-02 06:15 -0400
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-02 11:35 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-02 07:58 -0400
Re: // at beginning of line Lorenzo Villari <vlllnz@tiscali.it> - 2011-06-02 15:18 +0200
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-02 14:59 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 09:09 +1200
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-03 09:40 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 20:51 +1200
Re: // at beginning of line James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-03 06:57 -0400
Re: // at beginning of line Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-03 12:54 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-03 13:27 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-03 09:42 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-05 17:27 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-05 12:35 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-06 09:27 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-06 09:29 -0700
Re: // at beginning of line Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2011-06-06 14:37 -0400
Re: // at beginning of line Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-03 23:16 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-05 17:28 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-06 22:39 +0100
Re: // at beginning of line Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 23:05 -0500
Re: // at beginning of line Datesfat Chicks <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 13:34 -0400
csiph-web