[TUHS] Re: [TUHS]: C dialects (was: I can't drive 55: "GOTO considered harmful" 55th anniversary)

[Clem Cole <clemc@ccc.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1349 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:00 PM Paul Winalski <paul.winalski@gmail.com>
wrote:

> ... The committee's goal is to standardize existing practice of the
> language
> in a way that is implementable on the widest range of hardware and OS
> platforms, *and to provide a controlled way to add language extensions.*

Ah, the problem, of course, is right there.

Too many people try to "fix" programming languages, particularly academics
and folks working on a new PhD. Other folks (Gnu is the best example IMO)
want to change things so the compiler writers (and it seems like the Linux
kernel developers) can do something "better" or "more easily."  As someone
(I think Dan Cross) said, when that happens, it's no longer C. Without
Dennis here to say "whoa," - the committee is a tad open loop.   Today's
language is hardly the language I learned before the "White Book" existed
in the early/mid 1970s.  It's actually quite sad.   I'm not so sure we are
"better" off.

Frankly, I'd probably rather see ISO drop a bunch of the stuff they are now
requiring and fall back at least to K&R2 -- keep it simple. The truth is
that we still use the language today is that K&R2 C was then (and still is)
good enough and got (gets) the job done extremely well.    Overall, I'm not
sure all the new "features" have added all that much.
ᐧ

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2834 bytes --]