what are the Diffetences between all the Editions Of the C programming language?

[m_ilad__]

Hi.
As I mentioned already, I'm studying the C programming language.
Question:
I'm really confused!
i was reading the 2st Edition for several months.
i googled and foundout that there are other Editions.
I don't know perhaps 10 ! By other groups.
What are the differences between them?!
Oh god my brain got X up!
Better i leave the 2st Edition Book?
if Yes, what are the Advantages of this move?

Thank you all.

[m_ilad__]

Guys i checked and foundout somethings.
C89 and C99.
is the 2s-Edition Book the same C99?

Come ooon. A foolish is asking you.

[Geek-9pm]

What do you want to do?
C has been made a standard programming tool.
You should already have read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_%28programming_language%29

...  design provides constructs that map efficiently to typical machine instructions   .. .   has found lasting use in applications that had formerly been coded in assembly language, most notably system software like the Unix computer operating system.

C is one of the most widely used programming languages of all time... and C compilers are available for the majority of available computer architectures and operating systems.

Many later languages have borrowed directly or indirectly from C, including C#, D, Go, Rust, Java, ...

IMO, if you do not already have a strong desire to learn C, forget it. It is like trying to read literature of the 16th century. Out of date.

Learn Java or Python instead.

[camerongray]

IMO, if you do not already have a strong desire to learn C, forget it. It is like trying to read literature of the 16th century. Out of date.

Learn Java or Python instead.

I do have to agree with this above, C is not the best language to use nowadays, especially for a beginner as it is very easy to make mistakes (mostly related to memory management) that will not be detected until runtime (Or maybe not detected at all which could cause a major issue down the line).  As a first language (or a language to be used in the real world unless you are developing very low level system software) you would be much better off learning something like Python, Java or C# as the concepts used in them (such as proper object orientation and better handling of memory) are very useful to learn and make programming a lot easier.

As far as your question goes, are you sure you aren't just seeing different versions of the book? - Textbooks are often re-released every year with minor modifications, not really a big deal unless you are working with others and need the page numbers to match up exactly.etc.

[m_ilad__]

What doyou want to do?

Create an Operating System oneday

if you do not already havent strong desire to learn C, forget it. It is liketrying to read literature of the 16th century. Outof date.
Learn JavaorPython instead.

I have. I love C. Because it is almost a low level language and it is really fun to me to write
Programs in as lower level language as I can.
I got a lot to do with C.

C is not the best language to use nowadays, especially for a beginner as it is very easy to make mistakes

What do you mean by "Best Language" ?
For me, C is the best language ever created. Only low level languages are the Bests in my opinion.

.  As afirst language (or a language to be used in the real world unless you are developing very low-level system software)

Yes. In the future. As I meantioned above.

As far as your question goes, are you sure you aren't just seeing different versions of the book?

Heh. Yes I'm sure. And better we were discussed about the changes had been in C language.

C is low level, mid level, or high level, I don't care. If you ask me, C is a high level language.
I've already checked other languages people call "High-Level" they have everything ready for a programmer and
Make programmers stupid.

was my question just about the changes or C, and sweetching from edition to edition if it has any advantage.

Thank you all.

[camerongray]

That's fine if you want to go down that route but:

Programming languages that make life easier do not "make programmers stupid" they save a lot of time - Why would you, for example, write a system to manage users logging in when you could use one that is premade and already tested and known to be safe/secure.
While developing stuff like this on your own is fun, if you go into industry you will be required to work to a tight schedule, a company will not want to pay extra hours while you write something from scratch when the work has already been done for you.
You can also hardly call stuff like "object orientation" or automatic memory management a bad thing that makes programmers stupid - It just saves time.  Not only does it save time but it will prevent errors - You could easily write a program in C with a small memory leak or similar that could go unnoticed for a long time, however, down the line this could cause the entire system to fail causing serious issues to the organisation using it.

Creating an operating system - This is a ridiculously huge goal that I hear all the time - The fact is that apart from maybe making a very small OS to play about with - You will never get anything practical or usable out of it.  There are much more useful and realistic projects you can work on.

If you want, one day, to get a job in industry you will need to understand basic, modern, programming concepts such as object orientation - Modern systems are rarely developed in C, even some extremely complicated systems are built in a more modern language and use C for the low level operations.

[BC_Programmer]

Create an Operating System onedayI have. I love C. Because it is almost a low level language and it is really fun to me to write
I've already checked other languages people call "High-Level" they have everything ready for a programmer and
Make programmers stupid.

No. They make them productive. Only a stupid programmer would claim productivity is stupid. The "ready-made" library code is available for a reason. Things like HashMaps/Dictionaries, HashSets, Lists, Queue's, Stacks, and innumerable other data structures are not entirely trivial to implement (despite first-appearances) and some of the best optimizations are not at all obvious.

How long would it take a person to write a HashMap/Dictionary structure in C? More than 0 seconds that you have to spend writing it in Java or C#. It's good to understand the concepts, but it makes more sense to apply and use an implementation of those concepts by people who are smarter than you. You are not, for example, going to write a Dictionary implementation in C that is faster than Python's.

And what about C's Standard library? does printf() make programmers stupid? should they be using syscall() directly... Oh wait, syscall is a library too! Where are you drawing this entirely arbitrary line where ready-made, common data structures and functions being made available somehow makes programmers stupid? Not only does it make them productive, it typically results in code actually runs faster. If you don't have those structures available or you need to import something you wrote to use them, you will avoid them. "maybe I can get away with this crappier algorithm that doesn't use that data structure". If it's available via the standard library, it's a no brainer.

If you ask me, C is a high level language

Nobody is asking you because people prefer not to defer to inexperience. May as well ask a man born blind to explain what colours are.

was my question just about the changes or C, and sweetching from edition to edition if it has any advantage.

Speaking of inexperience, you are talking about editions of a Book Not editions of the language. There are no "Editions" of the C Language. There are versions and Standards (as you've discovered, such as C90/C99/C11). If you want to know the reasons to use the newer editions, you could do the unthinkable and actually see what changes, rather than make cogently devoid statements that "C is the best language" based on nothing but your own inexperience with anything- including C.

[Geek-9pm]

I have to agree with everybody. Except the OP.
Being able to write glean code is the the same thing a s doing a full Operating System. A OS beyond primitive input and putout methods gets to be thousands of lines of code. It is better when a group of people co elaborate on the project. Otherwise, you will have a project that will take a large part of you life to finish.

Linux and its variations are written in C. Maybe a small part in Assembly.  I was, at first, based on the i386 Intel CPU instruction set. Because it was well done by a group of people, it can be ported to another CPU. And it can be scaled down to fit into a mobile device. So that saves time and money and delivers a useful product. In a word, it is practical.

As for myself, I worked in  Silicon Valley a long, long time ago with the best tools from Intel where an assembler and linker under an OS that nobody remembers. Our job was to write very small programs for embedded test equipment that would test hard drive platters on a production line.  I had to work with many other people.

We all had piratical projects relating to the manufacture of  hard drive media. Early on we all stepped away from the low-level code and started to use high level stuff. One was language called PL/M from Intel.  It was way too expensive and not all that great. Another group worked  with a variation of Forth. Our group used Tiny Basic on a ROM. It was put into production equipment and worked great. I had modified it extensively to work in real time.

Back then, a good C compiler was not alienable to us. So we have to find our own answers with material  alienable at the time. At that time, several versions of BASIC where in public domain, and some other er things, like Forth. 

As for an OS, we used CP/M 2, which was much lower priced that the Intel OS. It did the job. We had no need to re write it. Once we had a working program, we would put a simple console I/O in it and put in on the production line. No OS needed. The operators used teleprinters. The output was on paper.

What I am saying is there is no practical need for another OS. What is needed is more applications for the things that people want and need to enrich  and improve  their lives in some way. Like an oven that will not burn your dinner.  On an pistol that can only be used by its owner.* Or a voice recognitions program that has 100 % accuracy.   

* They already did it.

[briandams]

Guys i checked and foundout somethings.
C89 and C99.
is the 2s-Edition Book the same C99?

since yuo are just starting out, go for the c89 first. Nevermind about the rest. Just learn how to use C first.
after that you can proceed on to other versions. There would be changes, but if you already know C by then, then its piece of cake to understand what the newer versions are.

[m_ilad__]

I have to agree with everybody. Except the OP.
Being able to write glean code is the the same thing a s doing a full Operating System. A OS beyond primitive input and putout methods gets to be thousands of lines of code. It is better when a group of people co elaborate on the project. Otherwise, you will have a project that will take a large part of you life to finish.

Linux and its variations are written in C. Maybe a small part in Assembly.  I was, at first, based on the i386 Intel CPU instruction set. Because it was well done by a group of people, it can be ported to another CPU. And it can be scaled down to fit into a mobile device. So that saves time and money and delivers a useful product. In a word, it is practical.

As for myself, I worked in  Silicon Valley a long, long time ago with the best tools from Intel where an assembler and linker under an OS that nobody remembers. Our job was to write very small programs for embedded test equipment that would test hard drive platters on a production line.  I had to work with many other people.

We all had piratical projects relating to the manufacture of  hard drive media. Early on we all stepped away from the low-level code and started to use high level stuff. One was language called PL/M from Intel.  It was way too expensive and not all that great. Another group worked  with a variation of Forth. Our group used Tiny Basic on a ROM. It was put into production equipment and worked great. I had modified it extensively to work in real time.

Back then, a good C compiler was not alienable to us. So we have to find our own answers with material  alienable at the time. At that time, several versions of BASIC where in public domain, and some other er things, like Forth. 

As for an OS, we used CP/M 2, which was much lower priced that the Intel OS. It did the job. We had no need to re write it. Once we had a working program, we would put a simple console I/O in it and put in on the production line. No OS needed. The operators used teleprinters. The output was on paper.

What I am saying is there is no practical need for another OS. What is needed is more applications for the things that people want and need to enrich  and improve  their lives in some way. Like an oven that will not burn your dinner.  On an pistol that can only be used by its owner.* Or a voice recognitions program that has 100 % accuracy.   

* They already did it.

Thank you for telling me part of your life story.
I know there is no need to create another OS.
i infact, wanna create a Mobile-OS, using C language and the Assembly language of the
processor I would work with.
For example the ARM assembly language or Qualcomm's.
You know, choosing a phone, burning the current OS, working with processor and so On.
If i finally could create a mobile OS with my team, i will ask companies like Samsung if they would
Use my OS in there phones. And it will be an open-source , so every companies can use it if they want.
And a great Food for the companies like Qualcomm or ARM.
i haven't yet taken a look at their Architectures, but Intel. Intel ASM syntax looks great.
But Intel has about 0% Market share in smartphones. (Although just for now. Who knows what would happen later?.)
And my dear friend, i won't write all the codes just by my own. will make a team, later.

Well... Android is Android. iOS is iOS. My OS, is Mine. (i don't mean Me).
I will use C to create Applications for OS's like Windows, windows phone,
iOS Mac OS, Linux, Unix and... To make money.
there are lots of Innovations in my mind for creating apps. But the mobile-OS project has to be done finally.
It's kinda crazy or anything anyone calls nowdays, will i fall down or not, i don't care

Let's live and breathe while acting weird!

Thank you All.

[m_ilad__]

since yuo are just starting out, go for the c89 first. Nevermind about the rest. Just learn how to use C first.
after that you can proceed on to other versions. There would be changes, but if you already know C by then, then its piece of cake to understand what the newer versions are.

Thank you,.my dear friend.

Thank you all.

[m_ilad__]

That's fine if you want to go down that route but:

Programming languages that make life easier do not "make programmers stupid" they save a lot of time - Why would you, for example, write a system to manage users logging in when you could use one that is premade and already tested and known to be safe/secure.
While developing stuff like this on your own is fun, if you go into industry you will be required to work to a tight schedule, a company will not want to pay extra hours while you write something from scratch when the work has already been done for you.
You can also hardly call stuff like "object orientation" or automatic memory management a bad thing that makes programmers stupid - It just saves time.  Not only does it save time but it will prevent errors - You could easily write a program in C with a small memory leak or similar that could go unnoticed for a long time, however, down the line this could cause the entire system to fail causing serious issues to the organisation using it.

Creating an operating system - This is a ridiculously huge goal that I hear all the time - The fact is that apart from maybe making a very small OS to play about with - You will never get anything practical or usable out of it.  There are much more useful and realistic projects you can work on.

If you want, one day, to get a job in industry you will need to understand basic, modern, programming concepts such as object orientation - Modern systems are rarely developed in C, even some extremely complicated systems are built in a more modern language and use C for the low level operations.

Thank you for your advice, my dear friend.

Thank you all.

[m_ilad__]

No. They make them productive. Only a stupid programmer would claim productivity is stupid. The "ready-made" library code is available for a reason. Things like HashMaps/Dictionaries, HashSets, Lists, Queue's, Stacks, and innumerable other data structures are not entirely trivial to implement (despite first-appearances) and some of the best optimizations are not at all obvious.

How long would it take a person to write a HashMap/Dictionary structure in C? More than 0 seconds that you have to spend writing it in Java or C#. It's good to understand the concepts, but it makes more sense to apply and use an implementation of those concepts by people who are smarter than you. You are not, for example, going to write a Dictionary implementation in C that is faster than Python's.

And what about C's Standard library? does printf() make programmers stupid? should they be using syscall() directly... Oh wait, syscall is a library too! Where are you drawing this entirely arbitrary line where ready-made, common data structures and functions being made available somehow makes programmers stupid? Not only does it make them productive, it typically results in code actually runs faster. If you don't have those structures available or you need to import something you wrote to use them, you will avoid them. "maybe I can get away with this crappier algorithm that doesn't use that data structure". If it's available via the standard library, it's a no brainer.

Nobody is asking you because people prefer not to defer to inexperience. May as well ask a man born blind to explain what colours are.

Speaking of inexperience, you are talking about editions of a Book Not editions of the language. There are no "Editions" of the C Language. There are versions and Standards (as you've discovered, such as C90/C99/C11). If you want to know the reasons to use the newer editions, you could do the unthinkable and actually see what changes, rather than make cogently devoid statements that "C is the best language" based on nothing but your own inexperience with anything- including C.

NoBody Asked you anything.

Thank you All.

[Geek-9pm]

Mobile OS? If you know C, fine. Go for it.   
As for Apple and Android, there are  lots of tools to develop apps.
Did you know FireFox is doing an Open Source OS for mobile devices?
The big companies do not like open source stuff unless it works to their advantage

Here is a link about the FireFox M bile OS project.
http://readwrite.com/2013/07/01/mozilla-releases-two-firefox-os-smartphones-to-spur-the-future-of-the-mobile-web#awesm=~os2GyaS9sakbGO
Two New Firefox OS Smartphones Spur The Future Of The Mobile Web
Very interesting. 

[m_ilad__]

As for Apple and Android, there are lots of tools to develop apps.

Yes, that's right.

Did you know FireFox is doing an Open Source OS for mobile devices?

Yes. I heard about it. But donno much.

The big companies do not like open source stuff unless it works to their advantage

Yes, that's right.
This sequence of characters make me think about the things are not created by others, Or
the current things that are not created Well, by others.

Here is a link about the FireFox Mobile OS project. http://readwrite.com/2013/07/01/mozilla-releases-two-firefox-os-smartphones-to-spur-the-future-of-the-mobile-web#awesm=~os2GyaS9sakbGO Two New Firefox OS Smartphones Spur The Future Of The Mobile Web

Oh thank you. I will check 'em out. i appreciate it.

Thank you All.

[BC_Programmer]

NoBody Asked you anything.

Thank you All.

Weird, I count three question marks in your original post, posted on a public forum. You got some answers, then you refuted them and offered them with a side of some uninformed opinions based on very little actual understanding of what you are talking about. And I pointed out that it was uninformed and also self-refuting.

[camerongray]

i infact, wanna create a Mobile-OS, using C language and the Assembly language of the
processor I would work with.
For example the ARM assembly language or Qualcomm's.
You know, choosing a phone, burning the current OS, working with processor and so On.
If i finally could create a mobile OS with my team, i will ask companies like Samsung if they would
Use my OS in there phones. And it will be an open-source , so every companies can use it if they want.
And a great Food for the companies like Qualcomm or ARM.
i haven't yet taken a look at their Architectures, but Intel. Intel ASM syntax looks great.
But Intel has about 0% Market share in smartphones. (Although just for now. Who knows what would happen later?.)
And my dear friend, i won't write all the codes just by my own. will make a team, later.

You really need a more realistic goal.  I have seen OSs made by individuals/small groups but they are very simple and really just proofs of concepts and have taken huge amounts of time to develop by really experienced and well educated computer scientists (For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MikeOS).  Then you think a company like Samsung would use it? Really?

I'm not sure if you are "trolling" or you really believe this but if it's the latter, it won't happen.  I see people very regularly wanting to build an operating system - It's always the newer programmers who haven't yet figured out how massive a task like that would be.  There is a MASSIVE difference between writing a small program in Assembly or C (Which I can easily do) and writing a large system that has to be reliable - You will soon get in a massive tangle of unreadable, impossible to debug code.

Even Android is built on Linux, not built from scratch - You do realise this and how long it still took to get to what it is today with huge teams of people as well as the open source community?  Similar deal with iOS which is built with Apple's Darwin kernel which is derived from BSD.
And FYI, Samsung did try their own OS years ago, 'Bada', and look how well that took off... They are also currently working on a new platform for some of their devices 'Tizen' - However, like Android this is based on the Linux kernel - Do you not wonder why all these companies are building stuff based on tried and tested technology?  Or are all their developers "stupid" as well?

You really need to set more realistic goals, forget trying to write an operating system (It will never happen except for, maybe a very basic proof-of-concept 10 years down the line).  Think of more realistic goals - Make something that hasn't been done before or build upon something that has rather than trying to completely reinvent the wheel. There is a large market for new and innovative mobile apps, web apps and desktop software - There is no market for a completely new operating system (mobile or desktop).

[briandams]

maybe not an ENTIRE system, but pick a part of an OS component and concentrate on it. Start small. I don't see the need to discourage him IF he really wants to do it. If you search around, there are many types of OS systems around some created from hobby projects. Who knows he might be creating one himself in the future?

[camerongray]

maybe not an ENTIRE system, but pick a part of an OS component and concentrate on it. Start small. I don't see the need to discourage him IF he really wants to do it. If you search around, there are many types of OS systems around some created from hobby projects. Who knows he might be creating one himself in the future?

I agree that a research type OS can be a cool project for someone who knows the work involved, what to expect in the end and is able to do it.  But the original goal here doesn't appear to be one of them, he wants to create a "Mobile OS" for companies like Samsung to use in their phones - This is a ridiculously huge goal that is completely unrealistic.

This seems like a typical idea from someone new to programming - Knows the basics of programming in a language and thinks they can write an OS not realising the work involved and how complicated it can be.  I see this all the time, loads of people start learning to program and ask "How long until I can make an OS?"  There is a reason why there are only a few major OSs out there.

Working on regular software, such as a mobile app, web app or desktop application would be a much better use of time and effort instead of learning stuff like C and assembly programming only to realise that the end goal of an OS is out of scope and that you could have spent your time much better learning other, more useful technologies.

[Geek-9pm]

Yes, I am a old man now and can not learn things in a day or two like I used to. I am still learning about my iPhone.
Have fun doing a mobile OS. Hope you find the people you need to help you.
Check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_mobile_phones

Android-based devices do not appear on this list because of the heavy use of proprietary components, particularly drivers and applications.[1][2][3]

WebOS was initially available only under a proprietary license but the source code was later released under a free license by HP. Still, Open WebOS will not run on all WebOS devices.

All mobile phones have proprietary baseband (GSM module) firmware.[4]

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM

[briandams]

I agree that a research type OS can be a cool project for someone who knows the work involved, what to expect in the end and is able to do it.

everybody starts from somewhere.

But the original goal here doesn't appear to be one of them, he wants to create a "Mobile OS" for companies like Samsung to use in their phones - This is a ridiculously huge goal that is completely unrealistic.

we are not here to judge. Maybe its a huge goal. but at least its a goal.

Working on regular software, such as a mobile app, web app or desktop application would be a much better use of time and effort instead of learning stuff like C and assembly programming only to realise that the end goal of an OS is out of scope and that you could have spent your time much better learning other, more useful technologies.

who gives you the idea that learning C is a waste of time, for his case?

[Geek-9pm]

who gives you the idea that learning C is a waste of time, for his case?

Unless you are into low-level programming, C and Assembler are not needed.

This is an old argument. For every person doing low-level programs there can be seven others building on top of the the work of the one. An there are seven more for each of the seven, each doing  doing horizontal development.  It is like a pyramid. Visualize it as an inverted pyramid. The low-level code is underground.

There are currently more than 98,000 SQL jobs indexed by Indeed.com.

[briandams]

Unless you are into low-level programming, C and Assembler are not needed.

wrong. who gives you the idea that only doing low-level should we be using C?  C can be use a starting language if TS is beginner to programming.  Further, TS already mentions his goal, so C is definitely in the bracket.

[camerongray]

wrong. who gives you the idea that only doing low-level should we be using C?  C can be use a starting language if TS is beginner to programming.  Further, TS already mentions his goal, so C is definitely in the bracket.

There are 2 camps for teaching C as a first language - The first argues that it's good becuase it's a very simple language that's pretty easy to get started working in.  I however am in the other camp which believes that C is very basic and doesn't contain a lot of constructs and concepts that more modern languages contain such as good object orientation and several data structures.  To me it makes a lot more sense to teach people concepts such as object orientation from the very start rather than trying to add it on later.

Yes, C can be used outside of low-level stuff but nowadays it is very rare to see this done.  For a hobbyist building small apps, there are many much more advanced languages out there.  Look at job listings, C is very low compared to other languages: http://jobstractor.com/monthly-stats.

who gives you the idea that learning C is a waste of time, for his case?

I didn't say it was a waste of time but I am saying that the time could have been better spent learning a more commonly used (Nowdays) language.  "His case" is the original goal of writing an operating system which as has been stated before is a nearly impossible goal.  A good programmer should be able to learn other languages very easily so to me it makes much more sense to learn something useful, use it to build smaller apps and down the line if the OP still wants to build an OS (By then they will have probably realised the issues with doing it) they can then learn the languages needed.

[briandams]

There are 2 camps for teaching C as a first language - The first argues that it's good becuase it's a very simple language that's pretty easy to get started working in.  I however am in the other camp which believes that C is very basic and doesn't contain a lot of constructs and concepts that more modern languages contain such as good object orientation and several data structures.  To me it makes a lot more sense to teach people concepts such as object orientation from the very start rather than trying to add it on later.

C is the "building block". the concept of OO has been around even in the C days. Think structs and you will probably know what I mean. Well, it really doesn't matter what we think because all of us think different. Its a matter of what TS think he wants so there's no point "forcing" our ideas on him. Since he is interested in C and developing an OS, then let him be. We can only advise this much. Other than that, debating around this is a waste of time.

[m_ilad__]

Well.. lots of answers I can give you...
It's like 90% of programmers are scared of doing Huge goals like the one I mentioned!...
What would be interesting for you then?!
i once said "i don't care any unsuccessful thing happen".
Life has to be with adventure, and I wanna be an adventurer.
Do you really think that I don't know about the things happening in 2014?!
i don't live behind the mountains! i know that's a huge goal with a huge Risk.
i know all of you are trying to point such good things to "me = a foolish (with the value of 0")
But, I'm on my rainy way, with Love.

Comerongray

buddy, nothing is complicated. Only people see things complicated.
Cause they're scared of being defeated. Being defeated means failure for most of the people.
But for me, it means [ Tried Anyway ].
You tell me write Useful apps for current OSs, instead of creating an OS.
so what if I try both?
When I say I'm up to create a mobile OS, doesn't it mean I will not try other things.
You said already Samsung tried and created an OS Like bada and see how well it took off. [i knew]
Well the answer is really simple!
Samsung is Samsung and me is me.
i don't care how successful or unsuccessful other people are. I see to myself.  if I can, I can. If I can't I can't.
i need the speed of C and to manage cpu and memory better. That's one of the reasons i picked up C.

[quotes]BC Programmer[/quotes]
About your answers you posted to three of my Questions, Thank you alot.

Briandams

Thank you, buddy.

geek-9pm

Thank you, sir.


Thank you all.

[camerongray]

buddy, nothing is complicated. Only people see things complicated.
Cause they're scared of being defeated. Being defeated means failure for most of the people.
But for me, it means [ Tried Anyway ].
You tell me write Useful apps for current OSs, instead of creating an OS.
so what if I try both?
When I say I'm up to create a mobile OS, doesn't it mean I will not try other things.
You said already Samsung tried and created an OS Like bada and see how well it took off. [i knew]
Well the answer is really simple!
Samsung is Samsung and me is me.
i don't care how successful or unsuccessful other people are. I see to myself.  if I can, I can. If I can't I can't.
i need the speed of C and to manage cpu and memory better. That's one of the reasons i picked up C.

That's fine, do what you want.  I just don't want you to be wasting your time on something that is (for most people) not possible.  How much experience do you actually have with computer science, low level programming or just programming in general?

We aren't calling *you* foolish, we are just pointing out that as a new programmer you are setting goals that are far too hard to achieve, this is really common, people start off programming and thinking of all the massive things they can do (Trust me, I've been there) but after working for a while and gaining more experience you will begin to see how massive and unrealistic some of those ideas can be.  I had loads of projects I started years ago that turned out to be far too complex or not even possible (due to not properly planning the stuff out in advance).

Just to put this into perspective, we had a coursework task at university to implement a simple version of the UNIX 'banner' command (Only worked with numbers) using C and then MIPS assembly.  This project took several days/nights of solid work and we had many issues that took several hours to resolve.  This was around 100 lines of code in each version (C and Assembly) and was being written by second year university computer science students.  As this grew, especially in the Assembly version, it became extremely difficult to debug and was extremely error prone.  And that was for a single, fairly simple command, think of the size of this compared to an entire (or even part of) an OS!

i need the speed of C and to manage cpu and memory better. That's one of the reasons i picked up C.

This is a very common argument that people use to try to justify the use of old/simple programming languages.  The fact is that unless you are writing some sort of scientific application or a massive system where every fraction of a millisecond counts.  Nowadays it is much cheaper to get more powerful hardware to run a system than it is to pay developers the extra time they would require to build the same system in something like C instead of, for example, Java.

[Geek-9pm]

This is a very common argument that people use to try to justify the use of old/simple programming languages.  The fact is that unless you are writing some sort of scientific application or a massive system where every fraction of a millisecond counts.  Nowadays it is much cheaper to get more powerful hardware to run a system than it is to pay developers the extra time they would require to build the same system in something like C instead of, for example, Java.

Exactly!

[BC_Programmer]

But, I'm on my rainy way, with Love.

I think you mentioned that in another thread...

[m_ilad__]

you're right.

C Programming Language:
i love C. she love me too! we are Happy together. she is the best cook I've ever seen.
another reason for choosing low-level language, is it allows you.to.build things from basic and very basic and scratch..
i wish i could write programs in machine language.. d@mnn! I will.go for that too!
you may look Today.
but i look Yesterday.. cause it take me to the places where Things born. [Adventure]
NoLogicalReason can stop me to forget learning C.
unless, Mr.Dennis Ritchie wake up from the grave and tell me: Forget learning C, pal, and Kiss the Wall !!
i was on C++ before. but Learning Object-Oriented languages is like.. Kissing a wall !!.
i'm learning intel assembly language, and it just... it just make me breathe! feeling relax..
it might be because of my brain that prefer Weird stuff Orrr...Strange..
that's another reason i chose C.
"How they created x "
Oh boy... i love that sequence of characters... well..
___/___/___/___/___/___/___/___/___/___/

Mobile Operating System:
i see everything "easy". even when it comes to creating an operating system that operates many modern works.
but Why?!
why do I need.to.create one OS, while there are exists already? while there are kingdoms in this world, like Google and Apple?
Because it is Fun!
Let's Fun, if even will fall down one.........Day.

 
include <stdio.h>
main ()
{
   printf ("Thank you all");
}

[camerongray]

Then good luck with your erm... endeavours... - Especially if you don't understand the point of OOP and seem to be physically in a relationship with a programming language...

Also no need to swear or use random bits of irrelevant code in posts - Code is code, English is English, you can't mix the two!

[m_ilad__]

Code is code, English is English, you can't mix the two!

That's what High-Level programming languages do [As Well]. Not me.

Thank you all.

[camerongray]

That's what High-Level programming languages do [As Well]. Not me.

You used random code in your posts, that's what I was talking about!  Programming languages do use some English words yeah, so does C, but that's hardly what I'm talking about.  Even assembly uses shortened versions of English (or even full words in the case of 'and', 'add'.etc)! 'Move'->'mv', 'Jump and Link'->'jal'.etc.

[Geek-9pm]

Structure in programming is not about shortcuts or mnemonics. It is about design and logic. You can have structure i almost any kind of coding system. However, some modem languages are remorseful for modern tasks.

A common practice  is to prototype a project using the high level tools. When an issue is found that relates to speed and size, attention is given to building a library of optimized  code fragments that can be used by the high level structure.

Back to the original question. If the OP wants a standard C, go for ANSI C. Even ANSI C can be represented in a modern style.

Ansi C Programming Guide Paperback - Amazon

The book "Ansi C Programming Guide" attempts to provide simple explanation for beginners about the various Ansi C programming concepts. This book is the single source you would need to quickly race up to speed and significantly enhance your skill and knowledge in Ansi C. This has been designed as a self-study

That is the best I can offer.

[BC_Programmer]

i love C. she love me too! we are Happy together. she is the best cook I've ever seen.

You can probably hardly program in C yet. I'm not even going to mention the fetishism.

another reason for choosing low-level language, is it allows you.to.build things from basic and very basic and scratch..

You never did answer me, however- why do the .NET Framework or C++ Standard libraries make a programmer stupid, when the C libraries don't? I mean, aside from the fact that you've sexualized only C so far.

but i look Yesterday.. cause it take me to the places where Things born. [Adventure]

We are products of the past, but we do not need to be prisoners of it.

No Logical Reason can stop me to forget learning C.

Well, at leasr you're considering things rationally. 

i was on C++ before. but Learning Object-Oriented languages is like.. Kissing a wall !!.

Maybe you shouldn't be anthorpomorphizing programming languages and having relationships with them?

i'm learning intel assembly language, and it just... it just make me breathe! feeling relax..

You keep mentioning you are "learning" things, but you've yet to demonstrate anything beyond basic comprehension...

it might be because of my brain that prefer Weird stuff Orrr...Strange..

I'll vote for 'strange' here.

Mobile Operating System:
i see everything "easy". even when it comes to creating an operating system that operates many modern works.

Taking us back to my comments about basic comprehension.

include <stdio.h>
main ()
{
   printf ("Thank you all");
}

If you include code you should make it valid code. The above (once you add the missing #) is only valid with C89.

I guess this sort of addresses what you were originally asking.

I don't think any C compiler strictly enforces one or another 'version' of the C language. Many of them have their own extensions (including gcc) or will simply allow all sorts of different syntaxes. I'm not even sure which compilers would allow Old style C function declaration.

[m_ilad__]

Programming languages do use some English words yeah, so does C, but that's hardly what I'm talking about.  Even assembly uses shortened versions of English (or even full words in the case of 'and', 'add'.etc)! 'Move'->'mv', 'Jump and Link'->'jal'.etc.

Yes. LLL too. but that's why i wrote "As well" for HLL.
 if anyone want to learn English from scratch, he/she  better take a few look at the HLLs like C# Or .Net.  they will help.

which architecture are those instructions Of?
well i've just taken look at the Intel x86 so far. and as far as i know, there are no "jal" Or "mv", if you meant x86.
but donno about the changes of the Intel x64 instruction set, if you even meant INTEL. Because i mentioned Intel ASM already here.

Thank you all.

[m_ilad__]

f you include code you should make it valid code. The above (once you add the missing #) is only valid with C89.
I guess this sort of addresses what you were originally asking.
I don't think any C compiler strictly enforces one or another 'version' of the C language. Many of them have their own extensions (including gcc) or will simply allow all sorts of different syntaxes. I'm not even sure which compilers would allow Old style C function declaration.

hah. yeah the # is lost. thank you for telling me that. but I put it. donno what happend!
Who stole it?!
Will edit it.
thank you all.

[camerongray]

Yes. LLL too. but that's why i wrote "As well" for HLL.
 if anyone want to learn English from scratch, he/she  better take a few look at the HLLs like C# Or .Net.  they will help.

I'm just going to assume that is a joke.  Also, apart from you wanting to feel "cool" writing obscure code, there is absolutely no advantage to that over using a language that is closer to English.  I mean, do you honestly feel that hard to read code is better?

which architecture are those instructions Of?
well i've just taken look at the Intel x86 so far. and as far as i know, there are no "jal" Or "mv", if you meant x86.
but donno about the changes of the Intel x64 instruction set, if you even meant INTEL. Because i mentioned Intel ASM already here.

Those instructions are from the MIPS instruction set which just happens to be the type of CPU I have written Assembly for in the past.  This brings me onto an interesting point... If you are so knowledgeable about this side of things and want to develop a Mobile OS, why on earth are you looking at the Intel instruction set which is (as you really should know if you at all believe yourself to be at this level) is a CISC chip.  ARM, as in what you will be using for a mobile OS, is RISC, so why on earth are you looking at Intel?

You also missed out my other question:

How much experience do you actually have with computer science, low level programming or just programming in general?

[m_ilad__]

But you know what, I don't know One thing about programming forums.
that is: when i ask about anything, members try to.add other things to the main question!

it was just a Question that what.are the Differences between C Editions. the changes. even tiny changes. just this.
I donno why you're trying to repeat All the stuff you learnt already!
Hah. OK Masters!
Respect
Respect
Respect

Thank you all

[m_ilad__]

How much experience do you actually have with computer science, low level programming or just programming in general?

didn't answer cause I really don't understand "How much"!
ill stay always a foolish. and will not mention about anything I learnt. (Unless its necessary) and It's not necessary here.

If you are so knowledgeable about this side of things and want to develop a Mobile OS, why on earth are you looking at the Intel instruction set which is (as you really should know if you at all believe yourself to be at this level) is a CISC chip.  ARM, as in what you will be using for a mobile OS, is RISC, so why on earth are you looking at Intel?

1st I love it. and It's fun
2nd because It's fun to stick to intel.
3rd because I wish one day about 50% of phones carry the ATOM intel CPU.
but you could have asked me if im learning ARM or Qualcomm Architectures. cause I am.
And im not knowledgeable.

do you honestly feel that hard to read code is better?

For me, Yes.

[m_ilad__]

hah.
This is hilarious. cause NoOne actually has given an answer to the main Question!
I expected a C experienced programmer to guide me.

Thank you all, anyway.
DONE.

[camerongray]

For me, Yes.

I had to laugh at this one - Please, explain why "Hard to read code is better" - That has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read in a very long time.

didn't answer cause I really don't understand "How much"!

Okay then, I'll rephrase that - "What experience do you actually have with computer science, low level programming or just programming in general?"

But you know what, I don't know One thing about programming forums.
that is: when i ask about anything, members try to.add other things to the main question!

That is usually because other members have found issues with your original question and are trying to help you!

ill stay always a foolish. and will not mention about anything I learnt.

What is that supposed to mean?  All I can read that as is "I like to play dumb"

All I can say now is that you are clearly trolling.

[m_ilad__]

I had to laugh at this one - Please, explain why "Hard to read code is better" - That has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read in a very long time.

well.. keep it up!

Okay then, I'll rephrase that - "What experience do you actually have with computer science, low level programming or just programming in general?"

don't see a reason to mention here!
why? To tell every1 how good or how bad I am?
Hilarious.

That is usually because other members have found issues with your original question and are trying to help you!

Didn't.

What is that supposed to mean?  All I can read that as is "I like to play dumb"

Sray hungry. Stay foolish.

All I can say now is that you are clearly trolling.

Yes. All You Can Say.

Thank you all.

[BC_Programmer]

All I can say now is that you are clearly trolling.

That seemed pretty clear when he was talking about something grossly inappropriate thinking we were "his friends".

[m_ilad__]

That seemed pretty clear when he was talking about something grossly inappropriate thinking we were "his friends".

O Really? hah ok My Not-Friend.
and waoo... "We" ?!
that "We" couldn't even give the right answer to the main question.
and my not-friend, wouldn't it be better to open a classroom and teach students the things you know?
And at the beginning of the class, tell 'em "I know everything and will tell you all even if you wouldn't ask me or like it" ?

Thank you all. [Especially my not-friend]

[BC_Programmer]

that "We" couldn't even give the right answer to the main question.

Your question made no sense. There are no "editions" of the C Programming language. The "Editions" you refer to are book Editions. Edits and changes made to the books themselves. I would guess some revisions do actually cover other revisions within the C language, however, as mentioned directly in the preface of the second edition, most of the edifications consist of refining examples and fixing errata. The First version covers C as it was in 1978; there wasn't a standard for it so effectively it went with one of the more standard dialects that were available. the Second Edition made revisions and fixed Errata as well as updating the code where applicable to apply to the newly standardized ANSI C standard. The second edition covers C89. There are no other revisions to that book to cover other versions of the language. Some of the other "editions" which are actually separate books might cover them but since you provide no details that is guesswork.

and my not-friend, wouldn't it be better to open a classroom and teach students the things you know?

? not sure where this is coming from. I'm not sure if knowing the difference between different books, different editions of the same books, and the versions of the programming language covered by said books can really be covered in a classroom. Seems like that basic categorization skill ought to be acquired through primary school, at the latest.

And at the beginning of the class, tell 'em "I know everything and will tell you all even if you wouldn't ask me or like it" ?

This doesn't seem relevant at all. Borderline trolling trying to incite a response with illogical non-sequiters.

[camerongray]

and my not-friend, wouldn't it be better to open a classroom and teach students the things you know?
And at the beginning of the class, tell 'em "I know everything and will tell you all even if you wouldn't ask me or like it" ?

Oh no, I'm your "Not-Friend" - How can I sleep tonight knowing that!

I do actually help a lot of people with programming (and other subjects) and back when I was in school, during free periods I helped out in the first and second year computing classes.  I did not teach pure programming in this (In our education system that starts in third year) but I taught them "Scratch" which I believe is a brilliant learning tool as it teaches kids the concepts of programming and the structure of code, but without errors caused by simple typos.  I'd also say that having a small game they can then play and show friends is going to engage them a lot more than having a message print out on the screen.  These kids at this point have not chosen to study this computing class, it's compulsory so they are not all that interested in raw-code.  But during this I saw some amazing stuff, I saw people pick up stuff so quickly I could see straight away that they were going to be a good programmer including one girl who, without any instruction, removed parts of her "code" in order to help herself locate a bug.

I do not know everything, nor have I ever claimed that I do - There is loads of stuff I don't know, or only know parts of.

that "We" couldn't even give the right answer to the main question.

That is true, as I did not know the answer to your original question (Which contradicts your claim that "I know everything").  I did however feel that, as a new programmer you were starting on C with no good reason that you were going down the wrong path as there are many jobs and more practical uses with other languages as compared to C.  I thought, as a nice person I would just let you know this so that you could make a decision about what was best.  You then came out with your ridiculous claim of "Creating the best Mobile-OS of all time, with the highest security system, and with the thousands of apps."  I felt that this claim was unrealistic (and still believe it is).  As before I saw this as a regular mistake/belief held by new programmers so I felt I should help guide you onto a path that would be a lot better.

Of course you stay stuck in the mindset of "I know best, I won't listen to anyone else, other programmers don't make OSs because they are scared and modern programming languages make programmers stupid" so ignore all this advice given to you.

Oh yeah, and you missed a question again:

Please, explain why "Hard to read code is better"

[m_ilad__]

I do actually help a lot of people with programming (and other subjects) and back when I was in school, during free periods I helped out in the first and second year computing classes.  I did not teach pure programming in this (In our education system that starts in third year) but I taught them "Scratch" which I believe is a brilliant learning tool as it teaches kids the concepts of programming and the structure of code, but without errors caused by simple typos.  I'd also say that having a small game they can then play and show friends is going to engage them a lot more than having a message print out on the screen.  These kids at this point have not chosen to study this computing class, it's compulsory so they are not all that interested in raw-code.  But during this I saw some amazing stuff, I saw people pick up stuff so quickly I could see straight away that they were going to be a good programmer including one girl who, without any instruction, removed parts of her "code" in order to help herself locate a bug.

Nice work, bud.
wish you successful in your life.
ahh... i may not have enough money to buy a good computer to use and.... to use a compiler.
the truth is It's months that I haven't used a C compiler. months ago my computer's hard disk terminated!
all programs i wrote is in the paper...
including the program that converts binary codes into decimal and reverse, or hex to binary and reverse, or hex to decimal and reverse, or hex to octal and reverse or octal to binary or reverse and all...
i too wanted show my friends a tiny program like this. but sorry if I dont access to any computer.
[/quote]That is true, as I did not know the answer to your original question (Which contradicts your claim that "I know everything").  I did however feel that, as a new programmer you were starting on C with no good reason that you were going down the wrong path as there are many jobs and more practical uses with other languages as compared to C.  I thought, as a nice person I would just let you know this so that you could make a decision about what was best.  You then came out with your ridiculous claim of "Creating the best Mobile-OS of all time, with the highest security system, and with the thousands of apps."  I felt that this claim was unrealistic (and still believe it is).  As before I saw this as a regular mistake/belief held by new programmers so I felt I should help guide you onto a path that would be a lot better.[/quote]
Thank you a lot. you're right but I'll anyway try what I told.

Please, explain why "Hard to read code is better"

because writing programs In LLL is more challenging and fun.

This doesn't seem relevant at all. Borderline trolling trying to incite a response with illogical non-sequiters.

no it does.

Your question made no sense. There are no "editions" of the C
Programming language. The "Editions" you refer to are book
Editions. Edits and changes made to the books themselves. I
would guess some revisions do actually cover other revisions
within the C language, however, as mentioned directly in the
preface of the second edition, most of the edifications
consist of refining examples and fixing errata. The First
version covers C as it was in 1978; there wasn't a standard
for it so effectively it went with one of the more standard
dialects that were available. the Second Edition made
revisions and fixed Errata as well as updating the code where
applicable to apply to the newly standardized ANSI C
standard. The second edition covers C89. There are no other
revisions to that book to cover other versions of the
language. Some of the other "editions" which are actually
separate books might cover them but since you provide no
details that is guesswork.

thanks a lot.

[briandams]

I'm not even sure which compilers would allow Old style C function declaration.

-ansi gcc switch?

[briandams]

hah.
This is hilarious. cause NoOne actually has given an answer to the main Question!
I expected a C experienced programmer to guide me.

Thank you all, anyway.
DONE.

See Reply #8. And that should be your last post that you need to be concerned about. the rest are just not relevant. Please go and do your own stuff.

[m_ilad__]

Thank you Geek-9pm, briandams, camerongray, bcprogrammer.

Sorry if i made you sad with my Words. i don't really want to
make anyone sad by talking about what I like.
many biggest projects had been written in C.
And this will keep going even Today.

[Geek-9pm]

Thank you Geek-9pm, briandams, camerongray, bcprogrammer.

Sorry if i made you sad with my Words. i don't really want to
make anyone sad by talking about what I like.
many biggest projects had been written in C.
And this will keep going even Today.

Well, don't worry about revisions to C. .As has been mentioned. C is not a standard tool and is not going to have any radical changes. It is needed to maintain  existing software.  Using it for new projects is your  choice.