[laserbeam]

I would say the complexity of implementing defer yourself is a bit annoying for C. However defer itself, as a language feature in a C standard is pretty reasonable. It’s a very straightforward concept and fits well within the scope of C, just as it fit within the scope of zig. As long as it’s the zig defer, not the golang one…

I would not introduce zig’s errdeferr though. That one would need additional semantics changes in C to express errors.

[qsera]

>pretty reasonable

It starts out small. Then before you know the language is total shit. Python is a good example.

I am observing a very distinguishable phenomenon when internet makes very shallow ideas mainstream and ruin many many good things that stood the test of time.

I am not saying this is one of those instances, but what the parent comment makes sense to me. You can see another comment who now wants to go further and want destructors in C. Because of internet, such voices can now reach out to each other, gather and cause a change. But before, such voices would have to go through a lot of sensible heads before they would be able to reach each other. In other words, bad ideas got snuffed early before internet, but now they go mainstream easily.

So you see, it starts out slow, but then more and more stuff gets added which diverges more and more from the point.

[Galanwe]

I get your point, though in the specific case of defer, looks like we both agree it's really a good move. No more spaghetti of goto err_*; in complex initialization functions.

[duckerude]

That comment is saying to use C++, not to add destructors to C.

[ubercore]

Modern Python is great :shrug: