Brazilian 20-something, which could maybe show. I think more than I speak, but there's still a post here and there. Sometimes in portuguese or simply a picture that amused me.
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: 4 days 15 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.
a cosplay photo so old it was taken on actual film (which explains the streaks from my scanner) and the con we were at doesn’t even exist anymore. it was around 13 years ago actually now that I think about it.
we're moving to an internet where children would be banned from reaching out for help and friendship online but abusive parents can post their children's every second online to humiliate and expose them for money with no pushback
I regret to inform everyone reading this post that the character pictured is Scamboli from Pinocchio 3000 (Pinocchio Le Robot) and he looks like this
That being said it is now a quest I will forsee to my grave; to find the video the screenshot is from. Solely because it doesn’t get any more niche than this.
ellievsbear
dailybridgerton
discoholicmusic
theartofmadeline
izzy806
baratheonpilled
andulkaphoto
snowghoul
