Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C23 thoughts and opinions
Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 02:48:40 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <871q5o29af.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 11:48:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f86e0e741270de1a6fdb7e3596a53ea0";
	logging-data="3538961"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19qmdYbKRHAQn0aef29vOOq"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3E2rg/DiUTvq9M2gnLbUeAusp5E=
	sha1:8dCYG574MmEF91TCAXUYYOR0FBg=
Bytes: 3034

jak <nospam@please.ty> writes:
> Kaz Kylheku ha scritto:
>> On 2024-05-24, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
>>> Bonita Montero ha scritto:
>>>> Am 23.05.2024 um 21:49 schrieb Thiago Adams:
>>>>> On 23/05/2024 16:25, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>> I ask myself what the point is in further developing a language
>>>>>> like this that can actually no longer be saved.
>>>>> do you mean C++?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, C.
>>>
>>> I think you have a lot of confusion about programming languages. C and
>>> C++ are not comparable languages.
>> Except for observations like that we can write useful, production
>> software that compiles as C or C++, but go on ...
>
> 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.

Oh?  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.  How would a compiler that behaves as you describe cope with
that?

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */