Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C23 thoughts and opinions
Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 18:05:31 +0300
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <20240526180531.00007259@yahoo.com>
References: <v2l828$18v7f$1@dont-email.me>
	<v2o57g$1t5p4$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
	<7d0e8f25-a8ba-4995-9b90-ff35f85d423f@gmail.com>
	<v2p91e$26lpk$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
	<beffc569-3606-b627-ded9-93ce8478f2dd@please.ty>
	<20240525142325.517@kylheku.com>
	<v2ul1f$3aa7c$1@dont-email.me>
	<871q5o29af.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
	<v2v7av$3d561$1@dont-email.me>
	<20240526153913.00007f65@yahoo.com>
	<v2vefo$3e72q$1@dont-email.me>
	<v2vh0f$3eaba$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 17:05:22 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="748cc89cfd4b455fba2588d67f703cb1";
	logging-data="3503865"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+oJcThikZTSLiaJIBQUpGuuAdlXHeBQA8="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:d/08BEUOS+TitZZPDNv0risHvL8=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.19.1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
Bytes: 6274

On Sun, 26 May 2024 16:29:35 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

> On 26/05/2024 15:46, jak wrote:
> > Michael S ha scritto: =20
> >> On Sun, 26 May 2024 13:44:32 +0200
> >> jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
> >> =20
> >>> Keith Thompson ha scritto: =20
> >>>> jak <nospam@please.ty> writes: =20
> >>>>> Kaz Kylheku ha scritto: =20
> >>>>>> On 2024-05-24, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote: =20
> >>>>>>> Bonita Montero ha scritto: =20
> >>>>>>>> Am 23.05.2024 um 21:49 schrieb Thiago Adams: =20
> >>>>>>>>> On 23/05/2024 16:25, Bonita Montero wrote: =20
> >>>>>>>>>> I ask myself what the point is in further developing a
> >>>>>>>>>> language like this that can actually no longer be saved. =20
> >>>>>>>>> do you mean C++? =20
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> No, C. =20
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think you have a lot of confusion about programming
> >>>>>>> languages. C and C++ are not comparable languages. =20
> >>>>>> Except for observations like that we can write useful,
> >>>>>> production software that compiles as C or C++, but go on ... =20
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Indeed there are c++ compilers who, if used to compile c code,
> >>>>> could decide to call the c compiler to do the work, but if
> >>>>> something in the code is not strictly c, then the compilation
> >>>>> will be in c++, the size of the executable will increase
> >>>>> significantly and will need of an internal or external runtimer
> >>>>> to work. If it were the same thing you would not get different
> >>>>> things. =20
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh?=C2=A0 Do you know of a C++ compiler that actually behaves this
> >>>> way? I've never heard of such a thing.
> >>>>
> >>>> C and C++ are closely related, and C and C++ compilers often
> >>>> share backends, but the two languages have different grammars.
> >>>> The gcc command, for example, can invoke either a C or C++
> >>>> compiler, but it knows which language it's compiling based on
> >>>> the source file name or command line options, before it's even
> >>>> seen the content.
> >>>>
> >>>> There are programs that are valid C and valid C++ but with
> >>>> different behavior.=C2=A0 How would a compiler that behaves as you
> >>>> describe cope with that? =20
> >>>
> >>> For example g++ makes something similar: if you pass a file .C it
> >>> compile the C code but if the file (.C) contains C++ code then
> >>> compile C++.
> >>> =20
>=20
> No.
>=20
> >>
> >> No, it does not.
> >> g++ compiles as C++ unless you tell it to compile as C with '-x c'
> >> option.
> >> =20
>=20
> No.
>=20
> >>
> >> =20
> >=20
> > You didn't read carefully or I didn't express myself well. I wrote
> > that the g++ compile c++ even if it is written inside a .c file.
> > However in doubt I preferred to try. If I pass to g++ a .c file that
> > contains c code, it compiles without any option, perhaps because it
> > reads as if it were c++ but in any case compiles it.
> >  =20
>=20
> No.
>=20
>=20
> The way gcc handles all this is actually quite straightforward.
>=20
> First, there is no difference between the commands "gcc" and "g++" in=20
> the languages supported, or the way the language is determined.  The=20
> only difference between these two is the standard libraries linked by=20
> default when generating a final executable - "g++" automatically=20
> includes the C++ standard libraries, while "gcc" only has the C
> standard libraries.
>=20
> In neither case does "gcc" or "g++" actually handle the compilation -=20
> these are driver front-ends that pass things on to the actual
> compilers, assemblers and linkers (and any other bits and pieces
> required).
>=20

I don't know how it works in your environment.
I am 100% sure that it works like I wrote above in my environment.
Specifically:
'g++ -c foo.c' calls binary cc1plus.exe
'g++ -c -x c foo.c' calls binary cc1.exe
'gcc -c foo.c' calls binary cc1.exe
'gcc -c foo.cpp' calls binary cc1plus.exe
'gcc -c foo.C' calls binary cc1plus.exe


> The front-ends determine the language to use primarily from the
> suffix of the source file it is given.  ".c" files are compiled as C.
>  ".cpp", ".c++", ".cc", ".C" (note the capital C), ".cp", ".cxx", and
> ".CPP" are compiled as C++.  (There are many other extensions
> supported for different languages.)
>

In my environment it applies to gcc, but not to g++.
In order to force my g++ to compile for other language you have to tell
it so explicitly.

> The language choice can be overridden by using the "-x" switch, such
> as "-x c" or "-x c++".  The standard can be specified with "-std=3D".
>

Yes, of course.

> There is no automatic detection of C or C++ based on the /content/ of=20
> the files.
>=20

Yes, of course.

>=20
> <https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Overall-Options.html>
>=20