Hikikomori Complex

32 they/them

[hikikomoricomplex]

Hello, and welcome to my blog!

Here, you’ll find all the posts I’ve collected about anime girls eating spaghetti. If you find a post about anime girls eating spaghetti on your adventures, don’t forget to bring it to me! Something nice might happen if you find them all…

[toiich]

Werner Herzog

[pjackk]

Lol i have almost completed the work

[flutterbvnny]

i guess i did say that once yeah …

[salamanding]

this comic was originally meant to be a metaphor about my current depressive slump, but o was ironically too depressed to do more than 7 pages. i also didn't realize that it's kind of just Kafka's Metamorphosis but ✨for girls✨

[piratesexmachine420]

C programming pop quiz

Given the following declaration and initialization:

auto x = 'a';

what is the type of x?

x is a char

x is a short

x is an int

x is a long

x is something else

this won't compile because auto isn't a C keyword

this won't compile for some other reason

(see results)

Remaining time: 6 days 6 hours

There are two correct answers here:

Under C99, C11, and C17 (GCC/Clang flags "-std=c99", "-std=c11", or "-std=c17"), the answer is "this won't compile for some other reason".

Under C89, C95, and C23 (GCC/Clang flags "-std=c89", "-std=iso9899:199409", and "-std=c23"), the answer is int.

Why? A few reasons:

auto is, in fact, a keyword. It has been since C89, and since K&R before that, and since B before that. It is a storage-class specifier (like static or thread_local or constexpr) and means "automatic storage duration"; AKA "this variable is freed at the end of the enclosing scope", AKA "this is a stack variable". Automatic storage is the default storage class for local variables (of course), and also only valid for local variables, so prior to C23 specifying it was always redundant.

Prior to C99, variable declarations without a type were implicitly given the type int.¹ Thus, in C89 and C95, this declaration is equivalent to auto int x = 'a';

From C99 until C23, this won't compile, but only because variable declarations without a type are illegal. auto is still a legal storage specifier. The relevant GCC/Clang diagnostic is -Wimplicit-int.

In C23 this declaration becomes legal once again, because a variable declared with the auto storage specifier and without a type (a so-called "direct declarator") now performs type inference. This is equivalent to writing auto typeof('a') x = 'a';

"But wait," you might ask, "why is x an int, if its type is inferred from its initializer? Isn't 'a' a char?" Nope! That's the case in C++, but confusingly, character literals in C have the type int, and thus so does x. We would have to write auto x = (char)'a'; to declare x to be a char.

¹A remnant of this behavior persists: writing unsigned, signed, short, long, or long long is equivalent to writing unsigned int, signed int, short int, long int, or long long int.

[yagithegoat]

Bunny maid at your service

[kartprowler]

it has been way to

[segamascott]

[estavelle-after-dark]

[nickl-art]

this is my favorite custom discord emoji I've ever made. perfect for after a long day at the long day factory.

[bimbo-on-board]

force fem the previous annons bunny "boy"!!!!!

i dont think i would use the word "force" in this case it was more like .... well i mean just look at her

[serafphim]

[sksktktk]

[lesserknownwaifus]

Emperess Frieda from Samurai Pizza Cats.

[cutecipher]

as a feminist i support recreational abortion

[cutecipher]

i have mixed feelings about competitive

[cutecipher]

*maddest ive ever been, eye twitching* thats baseless. its something else actually.

[can-i-make-image-descriptions]

[Image ID: Tumblr tags from haunted-skitty-doll reading: lemme guess you have mixed feelings on competitive cause you're not very good at it, i could get to the top of the abortion ladder ez /End ID]

[timeflow]

trans pride flag color picked from trans pride flag