I programed for 30 years; before the internet/web existed.the only language worth anything is C; everything else is just some bullshit script, or some dudes ego thinking he can do better, like C++.I programmed lots of languages... fortran, cobol, ADA, Pascal, Java, JavaScript, HTML, Pinescript, Pearl, Lisp, Python....nothing beats C, and you can do anything with it;and create anything.my first job was to create a ANSI C Compiler which created mCode (pre Java) with a debug for Sun Microsystems, and other unix workstations using their Widget UI system.It let coders program in C, doing anything from making trades on the stock market, to CAD systems.this was in 91/92... I was a white boy living in Japan at the time.the pussy was so good.didn't give a shit about anime, or hentai.
Why would I want to be a wash out like you though
>>109028097im livin' the life man
>>109028033you're telling me you wrote in ada, pascal, java, python and you still didn't get the benefit of modules?even fortran and javascript have modules nowadays.but not c.
>>109028111Based Cnile trips confurm eternal win 4 the win 4 the win
>>109028033>you can do anything with it;no evalno objectno code as datano anything
>>109028033based>>109028162modules are cope for people too stupid to set their PATH
>>109028175You can do all that in C if your brain has at least one crease.
>>109028033This is pasta. He's used it in several threads and is too lazy, or too much of a bot, to fix the errors with the names of Ada and Perl.
>>109028190no you can't. you may implement them which is not the same thing. go back to school.
>>109028194You need that one crease.
>>109028184>never outgrew c>is proud of ityou do you, cowboy.
>>109028175Don't forget:No standard library worth using No templatesNo modulesNo standard build system or command line argumentsBorrows everything from C++ post C99
>>109028226This but unironically.Mature programmers use real grown up languages like Rust.
>>109028033>nothing beats Cllvm Rust is faster now.
>>109028175Jeethon is an atrocious programming language. I have colleagues who use it but I just hate it so much I can't stand to write a single line of it. I guess I'm just better than the rest.
>>109028290You're not alone, I'm also better than the rest.
>>109028240Rust and C++ are just C for people who need to work with more than 1 other person
>>109028033You mean the language where you're guaranteed to get a CVE? >be Linux kernel>change data structure >use-after-free>wrong goto>local privilege escalation C is garbage. Even C++ isn't this much of a joke.
>>109028309it boggles my mind how people don't understand that C is mostly supposed to be retard simple to write a compiler for, of course its not going to hold your hand and have all the crap rustfags jack off to
>>109028319Rust is an adult thing, you wouldn't understand.
>>109028323rust is fine for what it does, but im literally writing for a proc that doesn't even have a C++ compiler right now
>>109028319>C is mostly supposed to be retard simple to write a compiler forWhich is why it is woefully inadequate and becomes a source of issues. Wake up.
>>109028319>C is mostly supposed to be retard simple to write a compiler forbecause c's authors were targeting the cheapest computer of its era: the pdp-6. that was 60 years ago. we have evolved since then.
You're all replying to a /pol/ thread. It's still active over there. He's having a good laugh at you taking the bait.
>>109028367/pol/ does programming bait?
>>109028191The question is is the pasta goodIs it meh or is it just like
>>109028232help me understand your worldview
>>109028365you say that but most webpages require GB numbers of ram to renderyou say that but it takes about a minute to boot up *a fucking text editor* ms word
>>109028437i mean, Rust or C++ or even not shit java/C# whatever would fix that.The real answer is that most people write for a fully featured multitasking OS on hardware with many gigabytes of RAM that is extremely well supported, they never actually have to do the weird crap that C shines in so obviously to them it will only ever seem antiquated and underpowered
>>109028442like i wouldn't write a windows desktop program in C anymore unless its a simple system utility or something, but i still fucking love C
>>109028365Rust is too high abstractions, and C++ is too much OOP bloat for system dev.I’m sticking with C.
>>109028033>CAD systemsno one uses C for CAD, lol. it's been mostly C++ for the last 30 years.t. worked in multiple CAD companies
>>109028461You can say this for basically any nontrivial software too. C is basically dead.
goto error;
>>109028465lmao
>>109028468>unwrap!()
>>109028476unwrap is just a panic, which unwinds the stack, so unlike goto error; it's actually safe and will properly cleanup anything with correct destructors, unlike bad gotos.
two reasons to write C in year 2026:adjusting an existent C codebasewriting for a barebones ecosystem that has nothing.
>>109028494Hmmm, but does the compiler guarantee in any way that those constructors be correct?
>>109028470it's dead, Jim. even embedded moved on. all you have left is Linux kernel (switching to Rust) and a handful of ancient projects.
>>109028033wrong. fortran. you said that you've programmed in it before, what does C have over god's favourite language?
>>109028507isnt the rust compiler still written in C++
>>109028507like genuinely people still need to write a compiler once in a while and fuck rust being the first thing you need to make a compiler for, i dont think you understand its use case lol
>>109028033Boomers once again holding society hostage by refusing to let go of a shitty inferior language. Millions of codebases will have to be rewritten to Rust in the next 10 years, it's basically non-negotiable at this point.
Stop bumping dogshit polfag threads you black retards
>>109028508based
Respect, but please don't say "programmed HTML", it's so cringe.
>>109028512>like genuinely people still need to write a compiler once in a whileLike who? Even for niche hardware, you're better served making a (macro) assembler than trying to shoehorn C where it doesn't belong.
>>109028544when u need to half ass a high level language for something you just slap C into it, its what you do
>>109028498ahem, systems programming
>>109028552you can do that in literally any language that compiles to native code and doesn't have a bloated runtime with garbage collector welded to it.
>>109028567>any language that compiles to native codelol, what?
>>109028567>just write your own rust compiler to program your old imac, bro
>>109028519>nooo! people can't use C!! it's not mOdErN!! they must be trolling!! jannies, protect me from the knowledgeable boomers!!! waaaaaa!
>use C for a semester as a total beginner>use some other stuff too and Python>assembly>C blew everything the fuck out I love C so much it's unreal.
>>109028033>dudes ego thinking he can do better, like C++That's how all great things come to be though. Same as with operating systems, file formats, or standards. Some egocentric guy just thinks he can do better than all the people before him and then does it. How do you think C was created? It also was people who thought they could do better than everyone before them.
>>109028033that's what i've learned too.Kernel and every core library (stuff like curl, SQLite, libfuse etc.) expects you to use C, use any other language and now you suddenly have an additional dependency in form of bindings, frequently they are not up-to-date, their APIs can be very opinionated (molded to "better fit" the target programming language with stuff like OOP etc.) and underdocumented compared to the source C library.The only exception i make is for GUI libraries like FLTK or Qt that are natively written in C++. But even then I tend to write only the GUI portion in C++ and everything else in C and link those together.Also I've learned to not bother with string libraries and just embraced C-strings. External C libraries, standard C library and even the syscalls in the kernel itself all expect null-terminated strings.>>109028468take defer pill (implemented with GCC cleanup and nested function extensions, soon to be in C standard too afaik)
>>109028904>soonjust 40 years too late. we have C++ now.
>>109028033>the pussy was so good.how do you do fellow c programmers, i am a fellow programmer, like you, japan is easy pussy, fellow programmer.you should move to japan, fellow c programmers, like i dead, a white boy, who lived in japan, did i mention i had the sex, my fellow c programmers.>was a white boynigger, what are you now?a black tranny?
>>109028375nah, its spooks, like always.
>>109028033>Faggy reddit-spaced larpA perfectly good thread died for this bullshit.
>>109028508>fortransi thought that rust was for trannies?
>>109028519>C programming language>no mention of politics>in a tech boardum...anon, did you take your meds today?
Dead lang for a dead operating system
>>109029107I'm afraid to google it, becuase I suspect it's low effort Xitter cross-posting rage bait at this point. There is some other thread on the catalog that was literally just that.
>>109028551huh? you're the kind of retard who tries shoving C into shit like 8080s and AVRs. shut the fuck up.
Being a C fanboy is such a basic bitch thing to make your programmer "personality". Zero imagination
>>109028033>codersmy dad works at nintendo and gave me direct intel that ur a fake and also suck cocks on a regular basis
>>109028033This is true and C is a high level programming language. Before the 2000s it was extremely popular for quite a while.Biggest tragedy in CS history is people being brainwashed into thinking it's too low level or you can't use it for high level stuff or thinking it would take too long. That's all bullshit.>>109028175You have never written a single line of C and it shows. This is exactly what modern day midwits say and think, they're totally clueless.Structs are objects. Most programs written in C still use objects. Everything is an object, it's just that the OOP craze from a while ago confused people. Now everyone moved away from that though.But you will see patterns that are extremely similar to traditional OOP everywhere in C programs. Methods are literally just functions that take a struct pointer as first parameter.
>>1090280336
>>109029257>heckin C is heckin deadhttps://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
>>109028232>No standard library worth using Not entirely true, many parts of the standard library are quite good and you use them often. It's only the APIs that are weird and outdated. Mild inconsistencies, bad naming, and they were never changed because of compatibility. But if you need a bloated standard library that does everything for you, that's a you problem, not a language problem.>no templatesThat's a GOOD thing. Macros are dead simple and good enough for the _ONLY_ place where generics are acceptable: containers. Using templates for anything else is plain stupid, you DON'T want to end up like C++ there.>no modulesThe fuck is a module? That's unnecessary. Ever heard of a library or a build system? Everything else is feature bloat and encourages bad programming practices.>No standard build system or command line argumentsGOOD. You want things to change over time. This gave us things like ninja and meson. Use those. If things like CMake and Makefiles were made standard we would be FUCKED.>Borrows everything from C++ post C99That's what bureaucracy does to every project. C99 was the last good version. Standardization is stupid.Bonus>no namespacesGood, use prefixes like a normal person. Namespaces encourage extreme unnecessary verbosity, "using" statements and other ridiculous things.>no bounds checkingGood, let the programmer decide if they want to pay the cost for that or not.>no classesGood, again use prefixes. Actually helps you realize not everything needs to be coupled to a specific class because the dependency is more explicit.>no interfacesThis is a lie, you see them all the time in C in the form of function pointers. You can group them into ""interfaces"" if you wish.>no polymorphismTagged unions, switching on enums, occasional function pointers, etc. Another lie and it's funny because other languages do the exact same thing just with different syntax.
Can someone tell me why I should put my tag in a struct together with a union, and not put the tag in each struct individually and then put them all (including the tag separately) in that union? For stuff like, muhUnion->type, muhUnion->Iknowits.thisI reinvented the tagged union but different from how I see it being implemented.
>>109029649ok, one last time: modules prevent combinatory explosion of header inclusion, so the compiler doesn't have to append and recompile the same source code over and over for each translation unit, for each header included.with modules, your dependencies are known on language level, so then you can point your compiler to one main file and it will find and compile the rest. no build system required.
>>109029257Troon
>>109029770
>>109029704No, you have a wrong, non-existent problem in your head. First, C compiles faster than any other mainstream language EVER, and it's not even close. Part of this is because of headers. It's extremely efficient because every translation unit only parses declarations that it needs, and you can compile multiple translation units in parallel.You can compile hundreds of thousands, or millions of lines of code split in hundreds of files in seconds or minutes, yet you talk about a problem that literally does not exist, on the language that compiles the fastest.C++ compiles significantly slower because of extreme feature bloat + template abuse (!!!), template abuse is the single slowest thing actually. And the entire standard library might as well be renamed to template abuse library. Templates also fuck up the concept of "lean" header files.>recompile the same source code over and over for each translation unit, for each header included.No, clearly don't understand what headers are, or the difference between declaration vs definition. That's why you keep parroting this problem that doesn't exist. Parsing declarations is cheap, and again, it makes parallelization infinitely easier and more efficient. Doing cheap redundant work is not always bad, here it's actually good.>with modules, your dependencies are known on language level, so then you can point your compiler to one main file and it will find and compile the rest. no build system required.That's not how any of this works. And introducing modules in this way you describe would kill compile times or require a complete language redesign pretty much. All because you're a lazy midwit who does not understand header files.Keep seething, but objectively C has one of the fastest compile times of any language.
>>109028033>took a community college course on C>never did anything with it>wow i just dont want to!>i really dont care! huh? >start lisp>accomplished nothing but learning lisp for lisping lisp>been lisping everyday for a year straight>built a raytracer and a broken rasterizer that never worked>I now care about C
>>109028512No, they really fucking do not.
>>109028512Technically and objectively correct.
>>109028507nigga not even rebol has died off, programming languages are effectively immortal at this point. the only way for a language to die is if it's reliant on some proprietary toolchain or is intertwined with some esoteric hardware.
>>109029649>Everything else is feature bloat and encourages bad programming practices.extremely retarded take>>109029704why do you have source code in header files
>>109029704
>>109028240Based chad yescoder.
>>109029704Skill issue.In fact anyone who believes modules was a good addition doesn't know how to code and in fact should do something else and stop sabotaging the field of computer science.
>>109030487if you actually wanted to learn something, take a look at pascal/delphi compile times, it is instant. c doesn't come even close.using c++ strawman. using a false assumption that modules prevent parallel compilation, lol, ok, you're a troll.
>>109032679100% true and real. I have seeing massive code bases compiling in a small fraction of a second. We are talking about whole projects: client side applications, server side applications, development tools, support tools, a full rebuilt. All of that so fast is unbelievable.
>>109032679On a cold compile and compared to TCC?
