A good chunk of the stories tagged with C are really C++ stories. I think it’s time we separate them out so you can filter one or the other and not both.
A good chunk of the stories tagged with C are really C++ stories. I think it’s time we separate them out so you can filter one or the other and not both.
I would love this.
Though I am not likely to filter out C++ stories; I always feel a little sadness when I discover a C-tagged story that is really C++-related.
C++ is not a strict superset of C (it hasn’t been since at least C99); and since, the two languages have diverged dramatically with only a few features from C++ being migrated back to C.
If a C++ tag is not created, I would, at least, argue for the C tag being renamed C-family so that it is more encompassing and so my hopes are not so high when I see it.
I agree and would also not filter it out but I can see myself filtering down to just C stories. I am not interested in C++ but having a way to just list plain C articles would be useful.
I find this similar to having FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD as separate tags - they are all BSD/Unix but different enough to warrant their own sections. C is also not C++ even if they share a common origin.
D? Anybody?I don’t see much point in ‘C family’ tag, as it’s hard to recall a single article or blog post that is relevant to all of the “family” at once and is not a 1000th rant about the perils of unmanaged memory.
+1
Added
c++andobjectivectags.Hm, so the “C” is currently documented as “C, C++ and Objective-C”. If “C++” were split out, we should also do that with “Objective-C”.
The question of C++ not being a superset of C, but Objective-C being one, is - in my opinion - uninteresting in this discussion, as use of their features is not at all C-like.
That being said, I’d be in favor, for exactly that reason: most of their discussion doesn’t apply to C at all.
How about also splitting the C tag into “programming in C” and “C is dangerous” tags that I can filter independently? :)
If I see another post by some noob about how pointers are the devil I’m gonna lose it.
They certainly aren’t angels.
SPARK doesn’t have pointers. They still write low-level code that’s effecient with no C-style vulnerabilities. Rust does that for temporal properties. Maybe we just dont need traditional pointers since we have better tools now. Why do feel a need for obsolete tech?
Support breaking out C++ and Objective-C. These languages have enough use and popularity to justify their own tags.
maybe c for c specifically and c-family for c++, objective c, d, vala, and the host of “little” system languages that start with c and improve on it with a few new features.
the rationale being that c does occupy a special niche that none of the other languages do, but other than that they all have fairly similar use cases.
But we already have a
rusttag…?