uecker

Regarding function syntax in C++: GCC's C++ frontend does not support nested functions. But more importantly, even if it did, I do not think there would be any conflict at all. While lambdas are …

GCC's nested functions can also capture variables by reference. A closure combines the function with the environment which is essentially what my wide pointer is that contains the static chain th…

Fair. If you only have one object to access such as the target pointer, then it probably makes not much difference with void-pointer based APIs such as qsort_r (for new APIs it would add type safety).…

I agree with your point. But I usually prefer the later anyway, because the code usually is not as nested anyway and having a name is often helpful, and also because I find the nested code with lambda…

Or without qsort_r, you could use a thread local variable: typedef typeof(dsq) dsq_f; _Thread_local static wide(dsq_f) wdsq; wdsq = CLOSURE(dsq_f, dsq); https://godbolt.org…

This is a good example. Without trampolines, this could look like this (Godbolt: https://godbolt.org/z/nK5fqMxjs ). int main() { struct Point { int x, y;…

C++ has the same solution as I propose here: A wide function pointer type. In C++ it is called std::function, but this comes with a bit of baggage. C++ 26 has std::function_ref which would be the exac…

I agree if your language is designed like this from the beginning as functional languages are, but in C you already have different syntax for functions. (edit: rephrased)

Correct (although the nightmare part is a bit exaggerated since return-oriented programming showed that non-executable stack does not help a lot). GCC can also put the trampoline on the heap, but thi…

Lambdas are just anonymous nested functions. But I like named nested functions more because they are more readable and would prefer them in most cases. Ideally you have both as most languages have. I …

My old patch from 2018? This was not accepted to GCC because it relied on function pointers being aligned and there were concerns with this. But I prefer this approach anyhow, as it does not impose an…

I don't understand this comment. There are well-defined ABIs for many platforms. Sometimes there is a defacto ABI defined by the first compiler supporting this platform, but generally there ABI g…

You are right that there are cases where it is not possible. But it also works when arguments are not passed in registers. The condition then is that there are less stack slots used than in the caller…

That version would at least warn with -Wall.

What specific examples do you have in mind where you would get a useful warning with a C++ compiler that you can not also get for C with gcc?

GCC warns by default since version 5, released more than a decade ago.

Yes, g++ -xc will call the regular C FE. So yes, do not try to compile C code using a C++ compiler. That you somehow get superior type checking with C++ is not really true anymore, as essentially all …

Renewables is more economical than nuclear, so investing in nuclear is a waste of resources. This is also why nobody does it. And no, nobody who hasn't lost their marbles is seriously considering…

We haven't reached peak coal because we did not start developing renewables earlier. We did waste a huge amount of resources in nuclear in the past, which still never became cheap enough. That we…

No, because nuclear energy is not a cost effective measure against climate change. Solar is.

Backdoored developers are ok?

I do not blindly trust anything, and come to the conclusion that downloading binaries from Debian trixie is a lot more safe. There is a world of difference between "curl | sh" and downloadin…

Yes, it does not solve the problems described there.

It is also relevant for dynamic linking on all Linux binary distributions.

Indeed, it now admits this. But what problem is this then really solving?

Huh, compiler interoperability is extremely useful. It usually works by ABI groups defining a common ABI for each architecture and compilers then following these ABIs (although not required a compiler…

Yes, using an arbitrary type that is different from the one of the object is UB. But any access of a representation byte using a character pointer is well defined, not just memcpy and I would also not…

Yes, Rust copied many good ideas from C (and added many new). BTW: If you use character-pointers, you also do not need to worry about strict-aliasing in C.

Maybe provide a concrete example instead of making vague accusations. Or rather, please not, it is not a useful discourse. A productive response to my comment would be an insightful explanation of how…