Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: BGB <cr88192@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2025 14:27:03 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <vteev4$15a4i$1@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> <vsjgjn$1v1n4$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsjk4k$24q5m$1@dont-email.me> <vsjlcp$230a5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsjmdl$277bk$1@dont-email.me> <VsdHP.1828827$TBhc.1078002@fx16.iad>
 <vskjlo$34st8$1@dont-email.me> <20250402220614.431@kylheku.com>
 <85mscxlqnb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vsl9sn$3vdjj$2@dont-email.me>
 <20250403121946.134@kylheku.com> <vsms75$1i8ud$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsnhq6$291i3$4@dont-email.me> <20250409124900.00000fa1@yahoo.com>
 <vt5r34$inuo$7@dont-email.me> <vt6an7$13tvo$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt6gp0$16ejo$1@dont-email.me> <vt7te4$2hqe0$1@dont-email.me>
 <20250410113730.000005a3@yahoo.com> <vtcuhp$3n7jv$2@dont-email.me>
 <vte0e9$plm9$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2025 21:29:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="470f0e90a4304f4610ce83392b7c8726";
	logging-data="1222802"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19JSs0Q0SjLrECAbxwRLBXW7fMDOlfMjik="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Cl/qecw9s+lMcrYlS2rYFEVOqH8=
In-Reply-To: <vte0e9$plm9$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3198

On 4/12/2025 10:21 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 12/04/2025 07:43, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 11:37:30 +0300, Michael S wrote:
>>
>>> So, IMHO, if C waits for C++ then it will wait forever.
>>
>> Seems like C is already committed to avoiding incompatibilities with C++,
>> if the decision on thousands separators in numbers is anything to go by.
> 
> It has been committed to avoiding /unnecessary/ incompatibilities with 
> C++ since C++ perhaps C99.  The C and C++ committees will not introduce 
> similar but incompatible features to each other unless there is very 
> good reason to do so.  The fact that some people think 1_000 is nicer 
> than 1'000 is not nearly enough to pick a different type of digit 
> separator for C.
> 

My main annoyance is that ' is already used for character literals, so say:
0x123'A'BCD

The ' needs to be handled as special in the tokenizing, otherwise it 
would give 3 tokens 0x123 'A' BCD. Its use is also inconsistent with its 
use as a character literal.


Then again, maybe one could argue the same for '_', but at least:
* Already used by a number of other languages;
* Serves as a common spacer in identifiers;
* ...


Personally though, BGBCC supports both.
* Potentially, _ could be disallowed in C++ mode if needed, as the 
tokenizer is language aware (partly due to subtle differences in token 
rules).