[DragonStrength]

A library can be written in one or the other. Note most of your "evidence" is job postings, which are generally written by non-technical folks who often mistake Javascript and Java. But no, there is no "C/C++" language or library. There are skills which help you in both. There is code that compiles with both compilers. There is no WG21 for C/C++.

Yes, Visual Studio supports both C and C++, but those are, in fact, two different languages.

You'll struggle to find the links you promised at the end because C and C++ are run by two different groups, meaning you won't be able to link us to single sources.

[pjmlp]

Of course there is no "C/C++" language, only people that failed at English grammar class, and have yet to update their English parser and semantic analisis.

From Herb Sutter, a name that you might know what relevance it has for WG21, I hope.

"Keynote: Safety, Security, Safety and C / C++ - C++ Evolution"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB7yR-1317k

[DragonStrength]

Context is important in English. Your example is, again, a different context.

A library is one or the other. Talking about safe systems languages where C and C++ share memory safety issues is very different from promoting a library. Thanks for the opportunity to clarify here. You’re confusing context with lack of technical precision.

[pjmlp]

Nope, I just have better things in life than to be pissed off in Internet when people using English grammar rules accordingly.

We both made it quite clear where we stand, so there is hardly any value pointing out uses of C/C++ expression by other key WG14 and WG21 members, papers or products.

[DragonStrength]

I only jumped in when I saw your inaccurate, condescending post. I'd hate for people to be misled by your confidence in making a pretty simple English mistake. Context always matters in English and precision matters in technical discussions.

"C/C++" has meaning in some contexts and reveals ignorance when used out of context. The post title here uses it incorrectly, but yes, there are ways to use it correctly. We disagree on that because you can't tell the difference in the two. So it is, but the actual explanation of usage is there for others who do care if they are perceived as non-technical in technical environments.