>> Like, in Haskell, if I want a 64-bit unsigned integer, I say "Word64".
>> In C, I say...
>
>    uint64_t
>
>    (Yes, it has been standard for almost 12 years already.)

Well, now I've seen everything... (All the sources I looked at said you 
have to write "long long unsigned int" or some mojo like that.)

>> Assembly gives you total control, if that's what you want.
>
>    And how do you specify a 64-bit unsigned integer in assembly, exactly?
> (Remember: You complained how C integral types are system-dependent.)

In assembly, you don't even "specify" how big a given data item is. This 
is an implicit property of what instructions you use on that data. 
Assembly isn't even high-level enough to pretend that it has data types. 
It just supports what the hardware supports.

There's a reason most people don't write assembly any more.

>> Haskell lets
>> you get on with writing a complex algorithm, if that's what you want. C
>> lets you do neither of these things.
>
>    Depends on the algorithm.

I would imagine so.

> C++ is definitely better in this aspect

Agreed. Writing programs that work properly seems a lot easier in C++ 
than in C.

Post a reply to this message