Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

What C does /prog/ prefer?

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 19:43

[ ] K&R C
[ ] C89
[ ] C99
[ ] C1x

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 19:47

Gnu C

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 19:49

No C90?

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 20:30

C99 lol

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 20:49

C0x

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 21:53

>>5
I also prefer cocks.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 21:59

BCPL is where it's at

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-28 23:24

C99, although I already am familiar with the stuff in C1x, as it's the same shit that's in C++0x (the atomics and unicode stuff).

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 0:20

C++

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 0:29

>>3
C89 and C90 are the exact same. C89 is the ANSI standard, C90 is the ISO standard.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 0:48

C99 is best C

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 0:54

C99 is best C
C99 is just C++ features added to C
most C compilers dont fully support C99 and require compile flag to activate C99

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 0:58

>>12
I use POSIX compliant operating systems, which support C99.
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/utilities/c99.html

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 0:59

c99+posix+a few of the most common extensions.
planning on switching to c1x when it's finished.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 1:48

>>12
GCC and Clang/LLVM both implement C99 fully. C99 is essential in modern POSIX systems.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 2:02

>>15
Surely you jest!  http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html

Of course, the important stuff is there.  People care about "static inline", member/array initializers, "long long", and "restrict".  Nobody gives a damn about wchar_t unless they were duped into using it the first time around.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 4:10

C1x
Thread local variables are handy and the _Atomic type qualifier might be useful too.

I'm all for standardizing (what are currently) compiler extensions to C - people probably won't abuse these features, it just avoids some platform specific code.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 5:13

C89 with GNU extensions.

Out of the C99 add-ons I use only the long longs,  Sepples comments, macros of variable arity, and variable-length arrays, and I don't feel like using an incomplete language just to have these.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 11:04

C99, because why would I want to declare my variables at the start of every scope?
Though lately I've been using cl.exe so I was restricted to whatever standard of C that uses.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 11:05

C89 ||
C99 ||||
C1x ||

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 11:11

C89. Only Sepples programmers like C99.
There are ways C can be improved, but C99 doesn't.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 11:12

>>19
C99, because why would I want to declare my variables at the start of every scope?
So you can keep better track of the stack, instead of littering your code with random variables like some PHP skiddy.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 11:20

I use C89 because that's what Xarn uses. C99 introduces some changes that make my life easier and I'd hate that!

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 12:30

c99

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 13:14

c89

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 16:31

>>22
Because I use tens of random variables, right? You're a moron.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 16:42

>>22
Enjoy your int i; for (i = 0; i != 100; ++i)

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 16:57

>>26
If you don't even use a lot of variables, why are you whining about where you have to declare them?

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 16:59

>>27
i != 100;
I don't think you're even a programmer!

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 17:05

>>29
Your homework for tonight is to compile it and write a one page essay on how the not-equals operator has increased staff synergy and leveraged industry best practices at software startups using Java and VB.NET.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 17:22

>>27
That's why I have a bunch of global index variables in my void.h. (Currently i, j, k, and index).

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 17:45

>>31
Non-reentrant code? Shouldn't be a problem, right?

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 17:51

>>32
REENTER MY ANUS

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 17:56

>>33
That implies that someone entered your anus in the first place.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 18:48

>>34
implying anyone on /prog/ still has an intact anus.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 18:56

While we're on this topic, I kindly request the EXPERT C denizens of /prog/ to explain this bullshit[1]:
(double (^)(int , long long))foo
``cast foo into block(int, long long) returning double''

[1]: cdecl.org

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 19:26

>>36
Explain what bullshit? That's a perfectly cromulent expression1.

1. in certain non-standardized C-like languages

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 20:15

plus plus

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 20:50

>>28
I'm saying that I don't use a lot of random variables.

Name: Anonymous 2010-08-29 21:05

>>39
I don't use variables. I use constants and functions on them.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List