Hi Charles,
My name is JeanHeyd Meneide, and I'm on ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG14 - the C
Standards Committee. I write about it in a personal capacity and
not-very-frequently here - https://thephd.dev/
So far, what I've heard about so far is the standardization of
GCC/Clang and other's __auto_type extension seemed to cause a lot worry for
folks, and that "nullptr" might not be hard to implement but unsavory.
After that, things like compatible type improvements, enumeration
fixes and improvements, required two's complement behavior, #embed,
__VA_OPT__ for macros, and more all came in to solve longstanding undefined
behavior or implementation-defined behavior issues, code portability
issues, and *so far* received pretty broad support from the communities
we've been in contact with.
(The above are all language-based features; there's library features
too such as the new stdbit.h header, improved time bases in time.h, the new
stdckdint.h header for overflow/underflow-checked arithmetic, and more.)
I'd like to know what things you find to be unpalatable or unsavory in
the direction of C! This can help us make decisions and inform us over the
next 15 years.
Best Wishes,
JeanHeyd
On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 1:55 PM Charles Lohr <loh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was just wondering if anyone from TCC on the standards committee? I
> just really hope for a compiler as popular as TCC, there's someone there
> defending the interests of all the not-GCC, not-clang compilers, where
> difficulty of feature addition is a paramount concern. I use TCC as my
> daily driver, and I have been increasingly anxious about some of the
> proposals and things that are being added to the C standard.
>
> Charles
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
