Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2025 12:35:39 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <861punleus.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <vrd77d$3nvtf$2@dont-email.me> <87a59hvgyk.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vrdi0g$47cb$3@dont-email.me> <vrdifm$4n2o$1@dont-email.me> <vrdj4b$47cb$4@dont-email.me> <vrdkcb$4n2o$2@dont-email.me> <86ecyronqa.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vrh548$3a4q5$1@dont-email.me> <86a59fo910.fsf@linuxsc.com> <865xk0ljcb.fsf@linuxsc.com> <vrogin$1ut0v$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2025 20:35:39 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9d1f1f7cc6a206205b2fa56df000aacf";
	logging-data="3198075"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Vd9/7fhnG20Y/gTxx1WTGIP+SIZn0rHs="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:X8H0rVSScZwoWT3wqZ1nA/1nNwE=
	sha1:pXHJXwSDknpxb6adY3NE0QhTtLE=

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

> On 22/03/2025 23:46, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> Here is my summary of the corresponding list in the C11 standard
>> (descriptive headings reprepresent my own views on each area):
>
> Thank you, Tim.  What I'm taking away from this is that I'm not
> personally affected by the changes.

I had a similar reaction when C99 came out.  In fact it was several
years before I started looking at C99 as a suitable alternative to
using just C90.  Gradually I began to see that the new features of
C99 offered substantial advantages over what C90 offers.  My
impression is the C community at large followed a similar timeline.

For C11 I am somewhere in the middle.  Most of the time I find C99
adequate, and don't need the capabilities added in C11;  so C99 is
still my default choice, with C11 being the exception.  However,
for building software libraries rather than just programs, C11
allows some significant benefits, so I am turning more and more
to C11 as I add functionality to the library projects I'm working
on.  (I should add that I try to write code that can benefit from
C11 but still can be called from C99 or C90, perhaps with reduced
functionality.)

> No doubt others will appreciate your summary for other reasons, so
> I've scribbled them down locally.  Thanks again.

Thank you, that is nice to hear.