Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The C23 edition of Modern C

gustedt.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 360 posts

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#21

Post by adamrezich »

f1shy wrote: post #14
com2kid wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perfectly valid to do if you need to interface with a large C code base and you just want to do some simple OO here and there. Especially if you cannot have runtime exceptions and the like. This is how I managed to sneak C++ into an embedded C codebase. We even created some templates for data structures that supported static allocation at compile time.

What would be an example of "simple OO here and there" that cannot be done cleanly in plain C?

Namespaces, methods.

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#22

Post by f1shy »

adamrezich wrote: post #21
f1shy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be an example of "simple OO here and there" that cannot be done cleanly in plain C?

Namespaces, methods.

Namespaces is not object orientation, is it? Am I missing something? You can place functions (methods) inside of structs in C23, can't you?

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#23

Post by flohofwoe »

pjmlp wrote: post #4
belter wrote: post #2

Important reminder just in the Preface :-) Takeaway #1: "C and C++ are different: don’t mix them, and don’t mix them up"

Specially relevant to all those folks that insist on "Coding C with a C++ compiler", instead of safer language constructs, and standard library alternatives provided by C++ during the last decades.

Funny because for a long time the Microsoft MSVC team explicitly recommended compiling C code with a C++ compiler because they couldn't be arsed to update their C frontend for over two decades (which thankfully has changed now) ;)

https://herbsutter.com/2012/05/03/reader-qa-what-about-vc-an...

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#25

Post by staunton »

f1shy wrote: post #22
adamrezich wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Namespaces, methods.

Namespaces is not object orientation, is it? Am I missing something? You can place functions (methods) inside of structs in C23, can't you?

On a high level, "object orientation" means you think of your code as representing the state and interactions of objects. You can equally well do this in assembly. If you think of some namespace as a "singleton object" then that's what it is.

I guess what you're really asking is what are the best or most common ways to do OO in C?

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#26

Post by kstrauser »

f1shy wrote: post #15
belter wrote: post #2

Important reminder just in the Preface :-) Takeaway #1: "C and C++ are different: don’t mix them, and don’t mix them up"

A couple of months ago, in the company I work, there was a talk from HR, where they explained how to make a good CV (the company is firing lots of people). She say: "if you have experience in programming C, you can writing just that, or, if you have lots of experience in C, is customary to write ``C++ Experience'' " Sooo... yeah... I should definitely change company!

That literally made me do a spit take, and it was fizzy water and it burned.

My god. That's amazing.

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#27

Post by card_zero »

jpcfl wrote: post #8
belter wrote: post #2

Important reminder just in the Preface :-) Takeaway #1: "C and C++ are different: don’t mix them, and don’t mix them up"

Bjarne should have called it ++C.

Because people choose to use pre-increment by default instead of post-increment?

Why is that?

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#28

Post by adamrezich »

f1shy wrote: post #22
adamrezich wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Namespaces, methods.

Namespaces is not object orientation, is it? Am I missing something? You can place functions (methods) inside of structs in C23, can't you?

Correct, and you did ask specifically for OO things, but I thought I'd list namespaces too as far as “C++ things you might use when writing C-like C++ code”.

Another big one that I always forget C still doesn't support is function overloading.

Re: The C23 edition of Modern C

#30

Post by f1shy »

staunton wrote: post #25
f1shy wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Namespaces is not object orientation, is it? Am I missing something? You can place functions (methods) inside of structs in C23, can't you?

On a high level, "object orientation" means you think of your code as representing the state and interactions of objects. You can equally well do this in assembly. If you think of some namespace as a "singleton object" then that's what it is. I guess what you're really asking is what are the best or most common ways to do OO in C?

Oh. I learned that object orientation is primarily a way to structure data and code, such that the data is encapsulated with the code that works on it, in so called objects. So an Object is the Data, plus the functions that work on the data, an ensure that some invariants are kept. In OO parlance, that code gets executed by sending messages (calling methods).

Where can I find something about objects being "think of your code as representing the state and interactions of objects" honesty totally new to me.

So no, certainly I'm not asking ways to do OO in C. But it seems to be more definitions of object orientation as I thought...

Post reply on HN