C function overloading?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by JaSeong Ju, May 31, 2004.

  1. absolutely. Which renders Stephen's remark even more meaningless...
    Mark McIntyre, Jun 2, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. JaSeong Ju

    jacob navia Guest

    Absolutely not.

    Microsoft MSVC is a better compiler than what I can do myself.

    It has better code generation, for starters, one of the fastest
    code generators around, and a dedicated team of about thousand
    people (peak).

    If you see the C language as fixed, frozen and ready to go the
    same path as the COBOL language you will find in MSVC the
    compiler you want. The compiler is in the C89 stage and will
    never incorporate anything new any more since Microsoft
    has publicy stated that C99 will never be implemented.

    In all respects, I think this is the compiler people like you
    jacob navia, Jun 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. JaSeong Ju

    Ralmin Guest

    Six names, actually.

    A glimpse from lcc-win32's <tgmath.h>?

    double overload sqrt(double);
    float overload sqrt(float);
    long double overload sqrt(long double);
    complex double overload sqrt(complex double);
    complex float overload sqrt(complex float);
    complex long double overload sqrt(complex long double);
    Ralmin, Jun 3, 2004
  4. Thats not what I said at all. What I said was "if you need C++ you know
    where to find it". I stand by that. If I want a language offering
    polymorphism, function overloading, templates etc, I use C++. When I want
    something lean and mean, I use C.
    MS also said that the internet had no future, and that Windows NT support
    would cease in 2002. I seem to recall some slight change of tactics...
    You have no idea what I crave, but for what its worth, its not a compiler
    and you can't get it in CLC.... :)
    Mark McIntyre, Jun 3, 2004
  5. Having such things does not make a language fat.

    Friedrich Dominicus, Jun 4, 2004
  6. What "path" is that? And what does it have to do with COBOL, which
    is not "fixed" or "frozen", and in fact has a very active and
    aggressive standardization process which has incorporated numerous
    features in recent revisions, and continues to incorporate more?

    C changes a lot more slowly than COBOL does. (This is not necessarily
    an advantage either way.)

    I suggest refraining from using COBOL as an example, if you're not
    familiar with COBOL.
    Unlikely to be generally true. MSVC has poor diagnostics - too few
    warnings at level 3 and too many at level 4. It suffers from odd
    implementation problems, such as its collection of conflicting C
    runtime libraries. It targets only a few platforms and operating

    There are reasons to use MSVC, but it's not the absolute best choice
    for everyone who's not interested in C99. That claim is simply silly.
    Michael Wojcik, Jun 8, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.