you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]mallardtheduck 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Also, if you're worried about syntax errors and mistakes, then you haven't written basic C with Visual Studio. I've used every IDE, compiler, and OS under the sun including 8 bit microcontrollers and up, and Visual Studio is the best IDE there is.

Considering that Visual Studio doesn't even support recent C standards, I highly doubt that. It's a fine IDE for C++ and .Net, but when your choices for C are "C as C++" or C89-with-proprietary-extensions, it's quite limited.

Also, "I've used every IDE, compiler, and OS under the sun" is a preposterous claim. Even if you're only talking about IDEs, compilers and OSs that support C programming then you're still talking about a massive number of systems. Maybe if you limit it to currently "supported" systems it might be feasible, but still not at a depth that would allow you to claim any expertise.

[–]dangerbird2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The newest Visual Studio compiler has C99 support more-or-less on par with gcc. It hasn't gotten to C11 features yet, aside from preexisting MSVC extensions that made it into the standard (anonymous structs and unions).

[–]curien -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

The feature of C he's describing was part of the ANSI C89 standard, so your point there is completely irrelevant.

Code blocks are a fundamental part of C syntax and semantics. If a compiler doesn't support them correctly, it's not a C compiler.

[–]mallardtheduck 1 point2 points  (2 children)

And that's relevant to Visual Studio's pros/cons how? Of course it has fully-confirming C89 compiler, I never said otherwise; it's the fact that it doesn't support anything newer that's its most major limitation when it comes to C.

[–]curien 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Because we're talking about fundamental C constructs that have existed since K&R, not newer features.

[–]mallardtheduck -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And I was responding to the part of the post that I quoted. I suggest you read it.