The Development of the C Language (1993) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Development of the C Language (1993)

#321

Post by pjmlp » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 1:53 PM UTC

falcrist wrote: post #318

pjmlp wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are the Arduino and ESP32 microcontrollers? Hint, might check their libraries/SDKs before answering.

Arduino is a platform, not a microcontroller. ESP32 is technically a microcontroller, but it's an SOC... which is not the kind that generally gets used for industrial applications in the field I'm in. You shouldn't assume I get to choose the platform I'm working on. That's not how it works where I'm at, and if (when) I do get to choose, programming language is unlikely to be near the top of the list of criteria.

Whatever you are forced to chose doesn't make the other options disappear from the market.

Re: The Development of the C Language (1993)

#322

Post by Thiez » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 2:47 PM UTC

badsectoracula wrote: post #8

w4rh4wk5 wrote: post #5

I wonder how much the pile of undefined behavior contributed to C's success. I can imagine that vendors picked C over alternatives due to C giving them more freedom with their implementation.

Isn't the other way around? Vendors already had picked C and they wanted to claim compliance to the then brand new C89 standard so anything they didn't want to give up on was deemed "implementation-defined behavior" and anything they couldn't give up on[0] was deemed "undefined behavior". [0] because their machines worked very differently from the others' machines

That doesn't really explain how stuff like not ending a source file with a newline is UB.

Re: The Development of the C Language (1993)

#323

Post by falcrist » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 3:22 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #321

falcrist wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arduino is a platform, not a microcontroller. ESP32 is technically a microcontroller, but it's an SOC... which is not the kind that generally gets used for industrial applications in the field I'm in. You shouldn't assume I get to choose the platform I'm working on. That's not how it works where I'm at, and if (when) I do get to choose, programming language is unlikely to be near the top of the list of criteria.

Whatever you are forced to chose doesn't make the other options disappear from the market.

The other options aren't relevant to my comment.

If you're going to be pedantic, you need to be both relevant and correct. You are neither.

Re: The Development of the C Language (1993)

#324

Post by falcrist » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 3:22 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #320

falcrist wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely is only C on the microcontrollers I'm doing work on. I don't understand why you're trying to cherry-pick like this.

I wasn't the one making an universal truth out of it. "Their libraries are written in/for C"

The statement you quoted is true of both of the examples you gave.

Also, you've deliberately chosen a specific interpretation of my statement in order to manufacture an argument that doesn't exist. You should probably avoid doing that in the future.

Re: The Development of the C Language (1993)

#325

Post by pjmlp » Mon, Jul 10, 2023, 4:23 PM UTC

falcrist wrote: post #324

pjmlp wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't the one making an universal truth out of it. "Their libraries are written in/for C"

The statement you quoted is true of both of the examples you gave. Also, you've deliberately chosen a specific interpretation of my statement in order to manufacture an argument that doesn't exist. You should probably avoid doing that in the future.