Home/ Questions/Q 64719
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-10T18:50:02+00:00

struct elem { int i; char k; }; elem user; // compile error! struct

  • 0
struct elem {  int i;  char k; }; elem user; // compile error! struct elem user; // this is correct

In the above piece of code we are getting an error for the first declaration. But this error doesn’t occur with a C++ compiler. In C++ we don’t need to use the keyword struct again and again.

So why doesn’t anyone update their C compiler, so that we can use structure without the keyword as in C++ ?

Why doesn’t the C compiler developer remove some of the glitches of C, like the one above, and update with some advanced features without damaging the original concept of C?

Why it is the same old compiler not updated from 1970’s ?

Look at visual studio etc.. It is frequently updated with new releases and for every new release we have to learn some new function usage (even though it is a problem we can cope up with it). We will also get updated with the new compiler if there is any.

Don’t take this as a silly question. Why it is not possible? It could be developed without any incompatibility issues (without affecting the code that was developed on the present / old compiler)

Ok, lets develop the new C language, C+, which is in between C and C++ which removes all glitches of C and adds some advanced features from C++ while keeping it useful for specific applications like system level applications, embedded systems etc.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Because it takes years for a new Standard to evolve. They are working on a new C++ Standard (C++0x), and also on a new C standard (C1x), but if you remember that it usually takes between 5 and 10 years for each iteration, i don’t expect to see it before 2010 or so.

    Also, just like in any democracy, there are compromises in a Standard. You got the hardliners who say ‘If you want all that fancy syntactic sugar, go for a toy language like Java or C# that takes you by the hand and even buys you a lollipop’, whereas others say ‘The language needs to be easier and less error-prone to survive in these days or rapidly reducing development cycles’.

    Both sides are partially right, so standardization is a very long battle that takes years and will lead to many compromises. That applies to everything where multiple big parties are involved, it’s not just limited to C/C++.

    • 0