Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jak <nospam@please.ty>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C23 thoughts and opinions
Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 07:14:30 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <v314rn$3t0gb$1@dont-email.me>
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>
 <20240526140327.709@kylheku.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 07:14:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4afa2250cbc8814ad2861df1c77fd119";
	logging-data="4096523"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/KmkPp5v+MWEz9gJw5O8q/"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QCeGJfM8C/eXtIXng8tJ9XDDZ/s=
In-Reply-To: <20240526140327.709@kylheku.com>
Bytes: 4098

Kaz Kylheku ha scritto:
> On 2024-05-26, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
>> Keith Thompson ha scritto:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>> 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++.
> 
> 1. The file suffix is not "something /in the code/ that is not strictly C".
>     The front end of a compiler collection selecting a compiler based
>     on file suffix is not an example of switching language based
>     on syntax in the file.
> 
> 2. g++ does not behave this way.
> 
>     In fact .C (capital C) is one of the conventions for C++ files. I
>     seem to remember that the convention was used at A&T and in fact you
>     can find examples of it in the source code of Cfront (the historic
>     C++ to C transpiler originally developed by B. Stroustrup).
>     
>     For g++ to assume that a .C file is C and not C++ would be insanely
>     poor.
>     
>     The g++ command even assumes that .c files are C++!
> 
>     Conversely, when you use the gcc driver command on a .C file,
>     you get the C++ compiler!
> 
> Since you'r posting to Usenet, you're obviously connected to the same
> Internet as the rest of us, so it's amazing you're not able to check
> your facts. You know about g++, so presumbly you have an installation of
> it somewhere, where you could run a 30 second experiment.
> 
> 

About what you are talking about I must apologize for one thing: in my
message that you actually report '.c' is written in capital letters.
Unfortunately, Google-Translator transforms everything that look like
brands or very short texts (c, c++, g++, ...) and initially I have not
noticed this. I hope to be apologized because I write every sentence
several times to be able to find a translation as close as possible to
what I would like to write. In relation to the tests you request, I
would like to point out that in Sun-26-May-2024-19:11:31+0200 I also
posted one that, If you had seen, perhaps, it would have avoided this
post.

'.c' in GT -> '. C'
(c, c++, g++, ...) in GT -> (C, C ++, G ++, ...)