Thread: Connecting structs/lists

Originally Posted by christop

Here's some more code that is valid C99/C11 but invalid C++:

Code:

struct foo {
    int x;
} y = { .x = 9 };

It's a (sometimes) very useful syntax that unfortunately does not exist in C++. C took line comments and a handful of other little features from C++. Why can't C++ take this little C feature that has existed in C for 16 years now??

Oh wow, I didn't event know about that, thanks a bunch! (For those interested)

It seems like in C++ it would be less useful though, just because of overloaded assignments and whatnot, still it would be sort of neat to be that specific. Another thing of note is that in C++11 there is a warning issued when an expression in an aggregate initialization is narrowing, which at least for myself means I use it less.

I'm even more curious now if there's yet more stuff to discover on this topic lol.

Edit:

One thing I did think of was the auto keyword:

Code:

// C
auto int a = 10;

// > C++11
auto a = 10;

I didn't bring it up because it's a specifier without any real use, that I've never seen in actual code, so it seemed like a stretch...

Well, all valid C is valid C++.

O_o

Sure.

For funsies, you can make syntax highlighters cry if you get creative.

Soma

Code:

#if defined(__cplusplus)
#   include <cstdio>
#else
#   include <stdio.h>
#endif

#if defined(__cplusplus)
    using std::printf;
#endif

void ShowMessage()
{
    int s = 0 //*!*/ 1; printf("You are probably using a C90 compiler.\n"); /*
    -1 + printf("You are probably using a C99, C11, or C++ compiler.\n");
    // */
    ;
}

int main()
{
    ShowMessage();
    return(0);
}

Originally Posted by phantomotap

Code:

    int s = 0 //*!*/ 1; printf("You are probably using a C90 compiler.\n"); /*    -1 + printf("You are probably using a C99, C11, or C++ compiler.\n");
    // */
    ;

(0.0)

(-.-)

(0.0)

10 out of 10! (So 2/3 in binary :P). Edit: Derp, it would be 2 out of 2. I sometimes forget how to number correctly.