Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vsjlkq$230a5$2@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 16:38:03 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <vsjlkq$230a5$2@dont-email.me>
References: <87y0wjaysg.fsf@gmail.com> <vsj1m8$1f8h2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsj2l9$1j0as$1@dont-email.me> <vsjef3$1u4nk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsjg6t$20pdb$1@dont-email.me> <vsjjd1$23ukt$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsjkvb$25mtg$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2025 17:38:03 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6ec1d618f3662fc028ed5e5779922e31";
	logging-data="2195781"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19jX2gvOvjrjHJLSXiGxUGs"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:O02tf0SqJx0m4hGbrXbLcvwny3s=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vsjkvb$25mtg$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2288

On 02/04/2025 16:26, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 16:59:45 +0200
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wibbled:
>> On 02/04/2025 16:05, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
>>> I suspect the people who are happy with C never have any correspondence with
>>> anyone from the committee so they get an entirely biased sample. Just like
>>> its usually only people who had a bad experience that fill in "How did we do"
>>
>>> surveys.
>>
>> And I suspect that you haven't a clue who the C standards committee talk
>> to - and who those people in turn have asked.
> 
> By imference you do - so who are they?
> 
>> 11. nullptr for clarity and safety.
> 
> Never understood that in C++ never mind C. NULL has worked fine for 50 years.

And it's been a hack for 50 years. Especially when it is just:

   #define NULL 0

You also need to include some header (which one?) in order to use it. 
I'd hope you wouldn't need to do that for nullptr, but backwards 
compatibility may require it (because of any forward-thinking 
individuals who have already defined their own 'nullptr').