Making C better (by borrowing from C++)

[Masood]

I know that this topic may inflame the "C language Taleban", but is
there any prospect of some of the neat features of C++ getting
incorporated in C? No I am not talking out the OO stuff. I am talking
about the non-OO stuff, that seems to be handled much more elegantly in
C++, as compared to C. For example new & delete, references, consts,
declaring variables just before use etc.

I am asking this question with a vested interest. I would really like
to use these features in my C programs.

Masood

[CBFalconer]

Chris Hills wrote:

Chris Hills <ch***@phaedsys.orgwrites

>CBFalconer <cb********@yahoo.comwrites

>>Chris Hills wrote:

.... snip ...

>>>>
In many many parts of the world "yank" is a worse insult.
In fact in some parts of the world Yank has been changed to
"septic" as in septic-tank == yank.

Well, I live in Maine, which is a major portion of New England.

Try some where on in N. America......

Sorry... Somewhere NOT in N. America. Come to that try calling a
Canadian a "Yank" :-)

I AM Canadian. I would only be amused at the callers ignorance.

--
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy New Year
Joyeux Noel, Bonne Annee, Frohe Weihnachten
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <fl**********@aioe.org>,
David Laudedale <no*****@nospam.invalidwrote:
....

>It's true that the constant sniping attacks from the liberal MSM have
had some effect on his personal popularity. However, if you asked "How
many Americans support our troops?" then I think the answer would be a
*lot* higher than 25%.

The whole concept of "Do you support the troups?" is BushCo spin. It is
a calculated effort to take people's eye off the ball.

To put it another way, the only correct response to "Do you support the
troups?" is "I pay taxes, don't I?"

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

[snips]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:08:10 +0100, jacob navia wrote:

You can't use gcc as a back end for your proprietary language,
mainly because it is too slow

So you don't do this because gcc is too slow, but...

because of its sheer complexity. Lcc-win code is 80% of the
speed of gcc

.... if gcc is too slow to warrant this usage, then lcc-win, which is
slower still, would be an even less appealing choice.

Er, is this supposed to be a selling point for lcc-win?

[David Thompson]

On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 09:28:34 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

<snipBut operators are overloaded routinely within C.
Even the humble + operator has many meanings; <snip>
And don't get me started on * ! :-)

'star'ted on? <G!>

- formerly david.thompson1 || achar(64) || worldnet.att.net

[David Thompson]

On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 13:19:57 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

Paul Hsieh wrote:
...

Really? Personally, I cannot even make that work. VC++'s editor does
not have a backward search, nor does it have Perl compatible RE
search, <snip>

He's talking nonsense. Of course VC's editor can search upwards. What's
more, it takes just a single keypress to jump to a declaration (and
another to pop back to where you came from), <snip>

.... if the relevant files are compilable (and you remember to tick
'build browse info' which the stupid 'wizard' never does for me);
or they _have been_ (compilable and) compiled (ditto) and have not
since then been changed in ways that throw off the line numbering.

Or, given a sane source tree organization and for an identifier that
is unique or at least rare, you can use 'Find in Files' over an
appropriate part of the file tree, and go through the resulting
matches forward, backward, or randomly, as you like.

- formerly david.thompson1 || achar(64) || worldnet.att.net