The C divided by C++ programming language

The name may be abbreviated as ``C/C++'' for convenience.

In C, types cannot inherit from other types. In C/C++, they must explicitly inherit from one of the built-in "root" types. Failing to specify a parent type is a syntax error.

Explicitness is enforced elsewhere, as well. For example, you must explicitly write the goto instruction at the end of a foreach loop (there are no other loop constructs) and the break instruction in branches of a switch statement. The ternary operator is likewise introduced with the if keyword to improve readability.

The language provides you with undefined, void, null, NULL, empty, and nothing. Using the wrong one in the wrong place is a runtime error. A twelve page auxiliary equivalence table is provided in appendix XIV in addition to the usual entries in the tertiary equivalence table.

>>1
>Failing to specify a parent type is a syntax error.

Bullshit.

>The ternary operator is likewise introduced with the if keyword to improve readability.

Maybe. But it's primary (ab)use is to mimic lazy evaluation.

>>2
Kodak, it's a troll.

Calm down broski.

>>2
Maybe. But it's primary (ab)use is to mimic lazy evaluation.
What the fuck are you even talking about? One of the consequent expressions is always evaluated immediately, the other is never evaluated at all.

Oh, I miss FV so much.
Please, hurry FV-san!

>>5
LOOK AT ME I'M AN ''OLDFAG`` WHO KNOWS AN OLD ANNOYING TRIPFAG AM I KEWL YET /PRO-B/?

>>1
With C != 0, what will C/C++ return?
1) 1
2) 2
3) undefined behavior (faggot)
4) Other

Frozen Void a shit

In C, types cannot inherit from other types.
They can easily do that in C.

>>4
Kodak isn't very clever, which is why he fails at things like basic mathematics.

>>4
>One of the consequent expressions is always evaluated immediately, the other is never evaluated at all.

You might want to try and write some actual C code sometime.

>>9
They can easily do that in C.
You can simulate inheritance in C. You can also simulate lambda expressions with clever use of structs and a couple of macros to enforce type signatures and calling conventions. This is of course not the same as having language support for these features.

>>12
They all compile to C
deal with it

>>12
Your post is irrelevant, someone said it was impossible, >>9 addressed that false statement, stating that it is not only possible but easy.

Guess it's time to learn D

>>15

It's not.

It is always time to go learn D.

return (rc = a()) ? (rc = b()) ? (rc = c()) :rc:rc:rc;

Looks like shitty emulated (static) lazy evaluation to me.

>>18
It's not much more than making the if else statement an expression.

>>18
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-circuit_evaluation

>>22
nice dubs bro

За Сталина