Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: is STC a good supplementary library for C?
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:29:59 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <v8llu7$3hdij$1@dont-email.me>
References: <j4KdnZzYDexmlDP7nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <containers-20240803130427@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <python-20240803162221@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2024 18:29:59 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d986d97f32d940f33aebcc88e980ad64";
	logging-data="3716691"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18lJNFHSC1FgGc0iJ76AVTN"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cSmgEOvtr0wlV2A1f+yD0mH46NM=
In-Reply-To: <python-20240803162221@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3750

On 03/08/2024 16:25, Stefan Ram wrote:
> ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote or quoted:
>> Embracing these traits leads to more maintainable, efficient, and
>> understandable code. Instead of trying to force C to act like C++,
>> it's generally better to leverage C's strengths and use techniques
>> that are well-suited to the language's design and philosophy.
> 
>    If you absolutely need a library, you (Mark) should totally check
>    out the Python library! It's been around forever, super reliable,
>    and constantly getting better. Here's a quick example program:
> 
> #include <Python.h>
> 
> int main() {
>      // Initialize the Python interpreter
>      Py_Initialize();
> 
>      // Create a Python list
>      PyObject* pyList = PyList_New(0);
>      if (!pyList) {
>          fprintf(stderr, "Failed to create Python list\n");
>          Py_Finalize();
>          return 1;
>      }
> 
>      // Add some integers to the list
>      for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
>          PyObject* pyInt = PyLong_FromLong(i);
>          if (!pyInt) {
>              fprintf(stderr, "Failed to create Python integer\n");
>              Py_DECREF(pyList);
>              Py_Finalize();
>              return 1;
>          }
> 
>          // PyList_Append increments the reference count of pyInt
>          if (PyList_Append(pyList, pyInt) < 0) {
>              fprintf(stderr, "Failed to append to list\n");
>              Py_DECREF(pyInt);
>              Py_DECREF(pyList);
>              Py_Finalize();
>              return 1;
>          }
> 
>          // Decrease reference count of pyInt, as it's now stored in the list
>          Py_DECREF(pyInt);
>      }
> 
>      // Print the list size
>      printf("List size: %zd\n", PyList_Size(pyList));
> 
>      // Read and print the integers from the list
>      for (int i = 0; i < PyList_Size(pyList); i++) {
>          PyObject* item = PyList_GetItem(pyList, i); // Borrowed reference
>          if (PyLong_Check(item)) {
>              long value = PyLong_AsLong(item);
>              printf("List item %d: %ld\n", i, value);
>          } else {
>              fprintf(stderr, "List item %d is not an integer\n", i);
>          }
>      }
> 
>      // Clean up
>      Py_DECREF(pyList);
>      Py_Finalize();
> 
>      return 0;
> }
> 
>    , output:
> 
> List size: 5
> List item 0: 0
> List item 1: 1
> List item 2: 2
> List item 3: 3
> List item 4: 4
> 
>    .
This looks like it wouldn't run much faster than in Python. So why not 
just use Python? It would be a lot simpler!