Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Talk:C (programming language)) (bot |
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Talk:C (programming language)) (bot |
||
Line 172:
: Hi, the added section (which I removed) appears to be an attempt to promote a link to a particular course as a citation, so [[WP:CITESPAM]]. The language in which it was written is inadequate for Wikipedia ("when we declare a pointer to pointer...": We?). A short sentence about pointers to pointers could be added to the Pointers section, but I think this article does not need any more code examples. [[User:Fbergo|Fbergo]] ([[User talk:Fbergo|talk]]) 11:43, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
::Yeah, the language was inadequate and the whole subsection was a bit excessive. Thanks for the feedback, I added in a short little sentence which should be fine. [[User:Erinius|Erinius]] ([[User talk:Erinius|talk]]) 17:35, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
== Delete the K+R example code ==
Should we delete the example of K+R C with the commented-out {{code|int}} types? Perhaps an example of this isn't necessary. Also, having recently looked at a first edition "C programming language", the function definitions and declarations include {{code|int}}, even though it may not be strictly required. [[User:Chumpih|<span style="text-shadow: 2px 2.5px 3px #448811bb">Chumpih</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Chumpih|t]]</sup> 19:56, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
: I'd rather keep the example, as it is of historical interest on the development of the language and integrates well with the section text around it. The code comments are a bit too verbose, and could probably be shortened a little. [[User:Fbergo|Fbergo]] ([[User talk:Fbergo|talk]]) 00:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
::Indeed, the comments are too much. But the concern is that this is the first significant example in the text, and it shows code that while technically acceptable to some early versions of the compiler, it is not idiomatic and representative of examples that would appear in K+R. The fact that the {{code|int}} type was once optional in the first version perhaps doesn't warrant an example.
::Or if there should be an example of early-style C code, perhaps one illustrating the function argument typing method would be more appropriate, i.e. arguments and types come on lines after the function name in the definition. [[User:Chumpih|<span style="text-shadow: 2px 2.5px 3px #448811bb">Chumpih</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Chumpih|t]]</sup> 09:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
| |||