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

Why Aren't There C Conferences?

nullprogram.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 383 posts

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#251

Post by pjmlp »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #218
phoe-krk wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, all of us execute stuff on kernels that are written in either C or C++ or C# or Objective-C, utilizing runtimes that are written in the same languages and calling APIs that are defined by the C application binary interface. That family of languages isn't going anywhere and choosing C instead of raw assembly is often chosen out of practical reasons, such as code maintainability. Still, I find it hard to put an e…

I said "implemented" in C. I'd argue that the runtime == the implementation.

Funny you say that, because Windows libc is actually implemented in C++ with extern "C" {} for the ISO C entry points.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#252

Post by spork12 »

AlphaSite wrote: post #79
tpush wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, there's CppCon as mentioned in the article, and C++ has pretty much the same wide reach as C.

To be honest C is kinda boring. Which is fine, but makes it hard to do a C conference.

I think it's more that C programmers don't really consider themselves part of a C culture in the same way that python, go, ruby, php etc programmers do. C programmers usually have another interest like kernel dev, firmware dev, or 3d game engines that is more interesting to them than the language itself.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#253

Post by bitwize »

C has seeped so deep into the collective unconscious of all programmers that the thought of setting up a conference for it is a bit risible. Branding a conference with your programming language is for languages that need to be promoted -- and C is perhaps the most accepted, most ubiquitous, and most cursed programming language ever, so promotion is the last thing it needs.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#254

Post by vmsp »

haberman wrote: post #72

C is effectively frozen in time, thanks largely to Microsoft's decision to deprioritize C support in favor of C++. C99 is almost 20 years old and MSVC still doesn't fully support it. Forget about C11. If you're a C programmer who cares about portability, you stick with C89. There's not a lot of point to having a conference about something that is stuck on a 30 year old standard.

But don't people, who compile C on Windows, usually compile it as C++? That means you in fact get access to some (most?) of C99.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#255

Post by pjmlp »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #158
lispm wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other implementations have parts of the runtime written in Assembler, Lisp, Java, ... A bunch of languages can be used to write a Lisp runtime.

The ones based on Java run on the JVM, which is always written in C :) The ones written in Lisp, well, at the bottom it's C again. I haven't seen a popular lisp yet with a meaningful amount of assembly in lieu of C.

Which Java VM?

There are plenty to choose from, implement fully in Java like jikes, partially implemented in Java and C++ like OpenJDK, implemented in Java and C like MicroEJ, and lots of other ones to chose from.

Then there is project Metropolis on the OpenJDK, which targets to replace Hotspot with Graal, thus reducing the amount of C++ code on the runtime.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#256

Post by dman »

baby wrote: post #209
visualstudio wrote: post #49

I could see it happening in the future. There's has been a mini resurgence in C from (normally high level language) programmers who are getting sick of web development and are interested in data oriented design. Conference benefits could be: Pushing the C standard. C11 is barely supported. Discussing new standards in a forum other than mailing lists. Did you guys know there is already a C17 standard? Letting old C de…

The problem is that nobody new to the scene wants to write C anymore. It's not a secure language, it has no convention and is full of hacks. On top of that it has undefined behaviors and is supported differently by different systems. Nowadays people want to write in Go, Rust, Swift, etc.

Fortunately not everyone makes technical decisions using the wisdom of crowds.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#257

Post by baby »

dman wrote: post #256
baby wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that nobody new to the scene wants to write C anymore. It's not a secure language, it has no convention and is full of hacks. On top of that it has undefined behaviors and is supported differently by different systems. Nowadays people want to write in Go, Rust, Swift, etc.

Fortunately not everyone makes technical decisions using the wisdom of crowds.

If people would switch to Rust and stop writing C the world would probably be a safer place yes.

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#258

Post by baby »

varjag wrote: post #226
baby wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that nobody new to the scene wants to write C anymore. It's not a secure language, it has no convention and is full of hacks. On top of that it has undefined behaviors and is supported differently by different systems. Nowadays people want to write in Go, Rust, Swift, etc.

Which scene? You still learn C to get work done with hardware, like it on not.

Looks like Rust is starting to become the hardware language

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#259

Post by brynet »

I believe it's mentioned, but BSD conferences are often a great place to find presentations that typically gravitate towards low level systems C programming.

OpenBSD has an events page with a list of past talks given by developers, along with slides, and if it exists, any video.

https://www.openbsd.org/events.html

Re: Why Aren't There C Conferences?

#260

Post by pjmlp »

beat wrote: post #106
TheDong wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how that follows at all. If you're implying all program languages are derived from C, that's simply false. Lisp is based on the lambda calculus and predates C, as one easy counter-example. If you're implying that all languages run on top of C, that's also false. Theoretical Lisp Machines [0] have been envisioned which do not run C anywhere, and many languages (rust, go, etc) can be built into unikernals t…

Okay, I'll amend my position from "Everything is based on C", to "Everything is based on C except for a handful of LISP machines that nobody cares about but a handful of fundamentalists". At which point someone who collects antique UNIVACs will tell me I'm wrong, too.

Modern C compilers are written in C++ actually.

IBM z, IBM i and Unisys ClearPath are still quite modern and aren't written in C, rather in memory safe system programming languages.

Then Windows is largely C++ and .NET, even what used to be plain old C nowadays has been migrated to play nicely when compiled with C++ compilers.

Finally there are a couple of embedded and real time OSes that are based on C++, like ARM's mbed or even Arduino libraries.

Post reply on HN