11–20 of 277 posts
Nice toy. It works until it stops working. An experienced C developer would quickly find a bunch of corner cases where this just doesn't work. Given how simple examples in this blog post are, I ask myself, why don't we already have something like that as a part of the standard instead of a bunch of one-off personal, bug-ridden implementations?
C++: "look at what others must do to mimic a fraction of my power" This is cute, but also I'm baffled as to why you would want to use macros to emulate c++. Nothing is stopping you from writing c-like c++ if that's what you like style wise.
Though yes, you should probably just write C-like C++ at that point, and the result sum types used made me chuckle in that regard because they were added with C++17. This person REALLY wants modern CPP features..
Nice toy. It works until it stops working. An experienced C developer would quickly find a bunch of corner cases where this just doesn't work. Given how simple examples in this blog post are, I ask myself, why don't we already have something like that as a part of the standard instead of a bunch of one-off personal, bug-ridden implementations?
Yeah, kids like to waste time to make C more safe or bring C++ features. If you need them, use C++ or different language. Those examples make code look ugly and you are right, the corner cases. If you need to cleanup stuff on early return paths, use goto.. Its nothing wrong with it, jump to end when you do all the cleanup and return. Temporary buffers? if they arent big, dont be afraid to use static char buf[64]; No…
I don't understand this passion for turning C into what it's not... Just don't use C for sending astronauts in space. Simple. C wasn't designed to be safe, it was designed so you don't have to write in assembly. Just a quick look through this and it just shows one thing: someone else's walled garden of hell.
Just don't mix that up with the real safec.h header from safeclib: https://github.com/rurban/safeclib/tree/master/include
Nice toy. It works until it stops working. An experienced C developer would quickly find a bunch of corner cases where this just doesn't work. Given how simple examples in this blog post are, I ask myself, why don't we already have something like that as a part of the standard instead of a bunch of one-off personal, bug-ridden implementations?
Yeah, kids like to waste time to make C more safe or bring C++ features. If you need them, use C++ or different language. Those examples make code look ugly and you are right, the corner cases. If you need to cleanup stuff on early return paths, use goto.. Its nothing wrong with it, jump to end when you do all the cleanup and return. Temporary buffers? if they arent big, dont be afraid to use static char buf[64]; No…
Any hopes that MSVC will add C23 support before 2040?
Any hopes that MSVC will add C23 support before 2040?
I don't understand this passion for turning C into what it's not... Just don't use C for sending astronauts in space. Simple. C wasn't designed to be safe, it was designed so you don't have to write in assembly. Just a quick look through this and it just shows one thing: someone else's walled garden of hell.
> Just don't use C for sending astronauts in space But do use C to control nuclear reactors https://list.cea.fr/en/page/frama-c/ It's a lot easier to catch errors of omission in C than it is to catch unintended implicit behavior in C++.
Any hopes that MSVC will add C23 support before 2040?
https://herbsutter.com/2012/05/03/reader-qa-what-about-vc-an...
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/c11-atomics-in-visual...
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/c-runtime-library/comp...
And the new guidelines regarding the use of unsafe languages at Microsoft, I wouldn't bet waiting that it will ever happen, even after 2040.
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/microsoft-azure-secur...
https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2024/11/19/windo...