• affiliate@lemmy.world
    5·
    9 months ago

    i will never forgive C for making the type syntax be

    char* args[]

    instead of the much more reasonable

    &[char] args

    it also bothers me that char* args[] and char c are “the same type” in the sense that the compiler lets you write

    char c, *args[5];

    with no problems. i think the C languages would be way easier to learn if they had better type syntax. don’t even get me started on C++ adding support for

    auto fn_name() -> ReturnType { … }
        • Bogus5553@lemm.ee
          4·
          9 months ago

          I personally think that C++ can be beautiful. For example: std::filesystem::path overrides the / operator, for specifying parent paths. It’s the same as Kotlin’s OKIO and Pythons standard pathlib.

      • CarrotsHaveEars@lemmy.ml
        2·
        9 months ago

        It could, but not necessarily.

        char **args can just mean you have a pointer which points to an address, and at that address, you can get a second address. Follow the second address, there is a char saved there.

        On the other hand, char *args[] means " follow this address to find a list of characters".

        • Oriel Jutty :hhHHHAAAH:@infosec.exchange
          2·
          9 months ago

          @racketlauncher831 As far as the C compiler is concerned, there is literally no difference between those two notations. If you declare a function parameter as an array (of T), the C compiler automatically strips the size information (if any) and changes the type to pointer (to T).

          (And if we’re talking humans, then char *args[] does not mean “follow this address to find a list of characters” because that’s the syntax for “array of pointers”, not “pointer to array”.)