Readit NewsYou can get it indirectly using _Generic().
Did you propose/implement/release something better than printf?
> I'm time and time again amused how anti intellectual and outright hostile to technological progress the programming profession is. programmers, out of all of them.
Perfect is the enemy of good. Some people talk about getting work done, some people get the actual work done and move on.
This is what the article is about? Things much better that printf are a dime a dozed and available since 20 years.
>Some people talk about getting work done,
Like this article does? While you busy arguing that you could do the same thing, but much worse?
What it didn't inherit from C was a way to write variadic functions with variadic types, so that had to be home grown.
I don't considers this to be "proper" variadic arguments, because a functions argument has to have a type. and these, as far as I'm aware of don't have one. This is about a powerfull as passing a void**. This is essentially memcopying multiple differently typed into a char* buffer and then passing that buffer. You can than correctly copies them back you have pretty much the same behaviour. Both methodss obviously lacks important aspects of the language abstraction of a function parameter and i don't what that feature can bring to the table that the previous techniques don't.
Edit: It's almost like the whole world got a lot of work done with the tools they already had.
When i want to print a string i don't want to worry about the security implications of that. With printf i have to. [0]
And i certainly don't want a turing complete contraption. [1] Also looking at log4j.
And even if everything is correct, it's has to parse a string at runtime. I consider that alone unaesthetic.
>Edit: It's almost like the whole world got a lot of work done with the tools they already had.
The best metaphor i know for this attitude is "stacking chairs to reach to moon". If you don't care about the limits of the tech you will be stuck within it.
I'm time and time again amused how anti intellectual and outright hostile to technological progress the programming profession is. programmers, out of all of them.
When it’s freezing cold outside, it seems crazy that I warm the air of my house and then use electricity to keep the fridge cooler than the air I just heated.
Someone needs to make a standard for moving heat/cool through all appliances in a house…
It can be implemented as a single line of force water flow with 20-25 Celsius. It is viable as both a heat source and a heat sink at the same time.
This thing can be connected to both your coolers and heaters, and thus transfere heat from one to another. Maybe you could even get you desktop computer into the loop.
Usually it implemented on a lager scale, but i don't see why this would work scaled down.
A lithium mine is much more devastating to the environment than an oil well or franking. That doesn't mean either of these are really good options despite what either side wants to pretend.
But it looks like a lot of people assume they are just as bad without any quantitate or qualitative assessment.
Lithium mining is way less bad than oil extraction in both dimensions. If that lithium can offset oil consumption it looks particular good.
C has been adding generics anyway, like _Generic.
"_Generic" added function overloads to c, not generics. The naming is exceptionally poor.
The submission is an example of generic programming. It an implementatin of something that works on all types that fullfill certain constrains. In this case comparable and swapable. "All types" include user defined types.
"_Generic" does something completely different. The C++ equvivalent would be std::conditional_v<std::is_same<T, int>, myIntFunc, std::conditional<std::is_same<T, double>, myDoubleFunc ............ The exact opposite of a generic, I'd argue, as myIntFunc and myDoubleFunc do depend on the type. You might use the preprocessor to create these functions that differ only in type, but then again, you might do what OP did.