Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

2
  • 1
    You kind of missed an important point here. On some platforms (microcontrollers), it may be necessary to provide alternative (and likely trimmed down) implementations of the standard lib. In my mind, it’s less about “I don’t need that” and more about “That implementation doesn’t work well for this use case, I need to flexibility to provide an appropriate one.” Commented Nov 27, 2019 at 10:46
  • 1
    @RubberDuck: That's the point I was trying to make. The Standard is intended to make the language flexible to a wide range of purposes, though I think it errs in simultaneously requiring too much (e.g. floating-point with longer than 32 bit significand, which doubles the cost of math on many processors without floating-point) but not allowing enough means by which implementations can indicate what constructs they do or do not usefully support. Commented Nov 27, 2019 at 15:26