Comment on an ambiguity in C89 which will never be fixedparentComments−inigyou29dnewc at 11, too. it was called c11.−avadodin28dop implies the issues in c89 were fixed with c99 not c11.it may seem like a slightly more ridiculous claim, given the infamous features added in c99, although, in hindsight, every version after c89 was less C–like than the previous.−inigyou28dit's just a silly pun. Also if you think C89 was peak, I encourage you to build a little ecosystem around it again and share it on HN.
Comments
newc at 11, too. it was called c11.
op implies the issues in c89 were fixed with c99 not c11.
it may seem like a slightly more ridiculous claim, given the infamous features added in c99, although, in hindsight, every version after c89 was less C–like than the previous.
it's just a silly pun. Also if you think C89 was peak, I encourage you to build a little ecosystem around it again and share it on HN.