[HexDecOctBin]

People chose C because they liked C. Of course they don't want C to change. The only thing the ISO committee should be adding is stuff for filling in the holes in language (C23's Improved Tag Compatibility and __VA_OPT__ are good examples), not add features that were never part of C and were never supposed to be there.

Your question can be reflected back to you: if you want an ever changing languages, go to Java, C# or C++, why mess with C?

[xboxnolifes]

> People chose C because they liked C. Of course they don't want C to change.

The same thing can be said for every other language, yet they change.

[WalterBright]

A common thing people write about D is don't add any more features except for their feature proposals. :-)

[oguz-ismail]

Well they shouldn't have. It was much more fun to program in Python 2.7 and Java 7, I wouldn't touch those languages with a five feet pole these days

[lifthrasiir]

Why specifically Python 2.7 and not, like, 1.5? Python 1 and 2 are as different as 2 and 3 (that is, surprisingly not much).

[pjmlp]

No, many people chose C, because they had to.

[sarchertech]

Yeah but those people are running it on some platform where it’s the only choice. And they are probably running a subset of C99. The likelihood of new features ever making it to those platforms is close to zero.

[pjmlp]

There is hardly any new C compiler that isn't C11.

[sarchertech]

I’ve been out of embedded for a bit but last I checked almost nothing actually implemented all of C11?

[pjmlp]

There is hardly any compiler worth using that isn't a fork of either GCC or clang.

So unless they are stuck on a pre-historic fork, they support C11 as much as clang and GCC do.

Exception for stuff like PIC, Z80,...

Which didn't even support proper C on their glory days.

[brabel]

This is funny because Java people say the same about Kotlin and Scala.

[WalterBright]

C added the absurd normalized Unicode identifiers.