Hi Branden, > Date: 2026-08-02 18:10:58-0500 > From: "G. Branden Robinson" <[email protected]> > > At 2026-08-03T01:08:32+0200, Arsen Arsenović wrote: > > Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]> writes: > > > Most programmers can live in the safe bubble of <string.h>: those > > > functions always require a string as input, and always provide a > > > string as output. Plain and simple. It's difficult to write bugs > > > when using those. > > > > > > That's the rationale. > > > > I do not follow. > > > > C has no namespaces, let alone qualified imports. > > That's true. > > > The name of a header providing some function is thus inconsequential. > > Then why not have one official big header file for the whole standard? > > #include <stdlibc.h>
Heh, curious thing: Plan9 did exactly this (actually, two headers). :)
#include <u.h>
#include <libc.h>
Not that I support that idea, of course.
>
> When you answer that to your own satisfaction, I suspect you'll have
> little trouble following Alex's argument.
Indeed. Thanks! You've replied in less words than I would have, and
were more clear than I would have been.
> ...which doesn't mean you'll agree with it.
>
> Regards,
> Branden
Have a lovely night!
Alex
--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
