Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: David Brown Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_technology_discussion_=E2=86=92_does_the_world_need?= =?UTF-8?B?IGEgIm5ldyIgQyA/?= Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 11:37:59 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 59 Message-ID: References: <877cdur1z9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <871q42qy33.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87ed82p28y.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87r0c1nzjj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <86ikxd8czu.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240710213910.00000afd@yahoo.com> <865xtc87yo.fsf@linuxsc.com> <87msmnu5e3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <87frsfu0yp.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 11:38:00 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dae6d3308ea626ceac54b1e213f1a152"; logging-data="3715150"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19I1yRoQ2PZURpPkTRcYUIBNwUrCjZMk/U=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:N+iDRCYq/MUhuHwM2ZtHWvYSq5Y= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB Bytes: 4714 On 12/07/2024 20:13, bart wrote: > On 12/07/2024 13:36, David Brown wrote: > >> One person's private sort-of-C compiler is of no more relevance to the >> C community than one person's private language.  You are welcome to >> make as many non-conforming changes to your own tools as you like, but >> they do not make a difference to C.  No one else will ever use your >> tool, so no one else will ever care about any incompatible changes you >> make to it.  If /you/ are happier having such changes in your tools, >> then that is great for you. > > Jesus, you just can't resist putting the boot in at every opportunity > and being incredibly patronising, can you? > If you say stupid things, repeatedly, you should not be surprised if people try to dumb down the way they speak to you. Start applying a bit of your intelligence (you say stupid things sometimes, but I know you are far from stupid), and you'll find the level of conversation going up. > I made the tweak to see how hard it would be to detect value-arrays > declared in parameter list (it was very easy), and what the consequences > would be on existing code (significant). No, the consequences are non-existent because no one uses your tool, and no one will ever copy that change in other tools (of significance). > > The example I posted showed a type (const char* x[]) where there was no > advantage to having that value array notation. Using 'const char**' > would be a more accurate description of the actual parameter type. > You can write your code the way you want to write it - it will not change the way anyone else writes their code. It really is that simple. Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Do you really suppose that if /you/ make "foo(char x[])" a syntax error in /your/ compiler, it will have the slightest effect on how other people write their C code? Or on what other C compilers do? Or on how half a century of existing C code is written? Personally, I don't like that C allows something that /looks/ like arrays can be passed to functions, but doesn't work that way. I don't think I have ever written a function with an array-like parameter - I use a pointer parameter if I mean a pointer, or have the array wrapped in a struct if I want to pass an array by value. But I don't think my opinions make a difference to C, and even if I were elected dictator of C for a day, I don't think my opinions should count more than any one else's - including those that like the way C works here. And I don't confuse my opinions or preferences with how C actually works and how it is actually defined, and I certainly don't spread such confusions and misunderstandings to others.