>>32
Nope. It just means that the C standard library is _small_.
_small_ and _useless_. You have to get anything else to get the job done, therefore its purpose is completely failed.
Can you believe that they actually criticized C stdlib for assuming a files-and-directories view of persistent storage?
It doesn't even standarize a way to handle fucking directories! It's completely POSIX dependent!
Some dissed it for only supporting linear, byte-addressed files; mainframe programmers were used to storing fixed-length records in more setup-heavy files, where the record boundaries were enforced by the OS.
That's actually the good thing about Unix: octet-addressed I/O. These "mainframe programmers" are the ENTERPRISE of old, IBM retards used to their shitty platforms. They can complain all they can, just like Spectrum programmers can complain that C doesn't support line numbers.
Linked lists and string buffers you can do yourself.
I can do the 15190348th incomplete, immature, untested, and probably bugged implementation of the basic data structures I should have at my disposal.
They're just a combination of structs and pointers, and structs, pointers and a len/size combination, respectively.
So? I can do them in assembly as well. They are just a combination of MOV and effective address calculation.
use strlen() and memcpy() and set the damn null byte yourself.
Yeah, or just use ___asm { ... }, am I rite? I bought a computer to make it work for me, not otherwise. Besides, I don't like to take a shit on abstraction — let alone an elemental one such as character strings.
Of course this is neglecting that just one mispredicted branch will cost you about as many cycles as filling in 32 zero bytes would... L2 cache misses are even worse.
OMG OPTIMIZED (read: I don't gib a fuck, if it's not fast enough I buy faster/more hardware and save my time which is more expensive)
That shit doesn't cover half the cases where null-terminated strings rule the skies
PDP-11? No longer in use, thanks.
What I see in these C-hatin' comments is people who don't have experience in using C for reals.
The reason why I
hate care about the standard library's shittiness is exactly that: I've worked in real stuff with C, and will probably keep doing so in the future.
ed and readability advantages of C but
and readability advantages of C
readability advantages
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
(Now you'll claim that I can't do C. Well I can, and I can tell they are a bitch to maintain.)
go back to Java or C#
Who said:
1. I come from Java or C#
2. I see Java or C# as the better alternative to C
3. I even like Java or C#
?
That's like saying, "ok, if you don't like getting your dick cut, go have your arms or legs cut".