On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Brandon Van Every <bvanev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Marko Lindqvist <cazf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have been told that VisualStudio lacks several C99 features (and
>> has incompatible implementation for some, I believe) simply because
>> it's not even meant to be C compiler. It's an C++ compiler.
> I don't think "meant to be" is quite the right turn of phrase, since
> it is a C compiler. Rather, as noted in that "wontfix" notice,
> Microsoft feels that its customers are C++ centric. So they put their
> development resources into that, and not C99.
> I must admit, C++ having far more users than C is an argument with
> some weight. Especially in the game industry: C is done for some
> things, but C++ is the primary resume skill. You may not care about
> resume skills around here, but a lot of people feel that kind of
> justification is important for what projects they work on. I have
> wondered how "Freeciv is strictly C" might impede developer retention.
> One could argue that GNU is C centric, being obsessed with the ability
> to bring up programs on all systems, no matter how obscure. Also,
> most "advanced" languages that are not C++, like Scheme or Lisp or
> OCaml or whatnot, have a much easier time talking to C.
Actually, GCC usually supports C++ features before they are
implemented in Visual Studio.
Take TR1 functionality for example. One thing it tradiotionally lagged
behind was in code optimization, but even that has changed recently.
Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa
PhD Student and Teaching Assistant at Department of Information
Systems and Computer Science
IST/Technical University of Lisbon
Freeciv-dev mailing list