the new c standard

[CDER]

Hello all , hope you are all doing well .
is there is any news about the new c standard C1X ? i googled a little bit and i found some articles but i wanted to ask you too for those who knows more
thank you..

[JosAH]

Hello all , hope you are all doing well .
is there is any news about the new c standard C1X ? i googled a little bit and i found some articles but i wanted to ask you too for those who knows more
thank you..

They just got through their errata list of C99 in 2007; give those guys a break ;-)

kind regards,

Jos

[CDER]

lol thanks , i guess you are right but i hope they come with a good solid new standard

[JosAH]

lol thanks , i guess you are right but i hope they come with a good solid new standard

The latests errata lists are full of a complex type and the functions that deal with it; those numerical group guys have laid their hands on the Standard ...

kind regards,

Jos

[CDER]

The latests errata lists are full of a complex type and the functions that deal with it; those numerical group guys have laid their hands on the Standard ...

kind regards,

Jos

i read about that , actually its a good thing cause those guys awas always complaining about c standard and numerical support in c types
Thanks.

[Banfa]

I'm not sure I agree. C has many many applications and implementing a feature just for 1 small subset of those applications as part of the language standard seems a little wrong to me.

What if all the application areas that use C start requesting standard additions to support their particular application?

C is supposed to be small and light and a small step up from assembler and it seems to me that this breaks that particular paradigm.

[hsheboul]

I'm not sure I agree. C has many many applications and implementing a feature just for 1 small subset of those applications as part of the language standard seems a little wrong to me.

What if all the application areas that use C start requesting standard additions to support their particular application?

C is supposed to be small and light and a small step up from assembler and it seems to me that this breaks that particular paradigm.

That's absolutely right! Other than Assemblers, C is the language of choice that's very close to the hardware and the operating system, of course not the MS Windows.

Also, up to this point, many new "testbed" language compilers that generate C code, and then a domain-specific optimizing C compiler is used to generate the final code.

A lot of other well-known paradigms and world-research problems make use of these optimizing C compilers. A world-wide research is also continually contribute to these existing C compilers, in many issues and terms. Most of these, according to my best knowledge use the C89 standard, as in K&R 2nd edition.

[JosAH]

I'm not sure I agree. C has many many applications and implementing a feature just for 1 small subset of those applications as part of the language standard seems a little wrong to me.

What if all the application areas that use C start requesting standard additions to support their particular application?

C is supposed to be small and light and a small step up from assembler and it seems to me that this breaks that particular paradigm.

Mwah, that numerical computing group wanted a complex type and all of its arithmetic implemented. Now you have to do something like:

 #define complex 1

... or similar and the "complex" identifier is keyword all of a sudden (I personally hate that trickery-dickery). It doesn't cost much, parser-wise speaking that is, but the math library sure grows a bit because of that luxury. I guess they (the numerical computing group) wanted to get rid of all the Fortran ;-)

kind regards,

Jos