Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pjmlp 384 days ago
Not only it was a good proposal, since 1990 that WG14 has not done anything else into that sense, and doesn't look like it ever will.
1 comments

Let's see. We have a relatively concrete plan to add dependent structure types to C2Y: struct foo { size_t n; char (buf)[.n]; };

Once we have this, the wide pointer could just be introduced as syntactic sugar for this. char (buf)[:] = ..

Personally, I would want the dependent structure type first as it is more powerful and low-level with no need to decide on a new ABI.

This feels like such a massive overkill complexity-wise for something so basic.
Why do you think so? The wide pointers are syntactic sugar on top of it, so from an implementation point of view not really simpler.
Thanks, interesting to see how it will turn out.