Hi...

I am relativ new to the impressive and powerfull C language, but i
thinks it is obsolete...

The idea with header/source files where methods can clash into
eachother i don't like... Look at C# which is much cleaner with
namespaces.

Why has C not namespaces and a "area idea" where some methods and
fields could be hidden from the outside?

Something like:

a_source_file.c:

namespace SomeName(.SomeName)
{
area Stack
{
private int[] myStack;

private void someMethod() {};

Lasse Espeholt writes:

It sounds like you can get what you want from C++.

On 2006-07-12 23:29:50 +0200, Ben Pfaff cs.stanford.edu> said:

There is still the header issue which i'm not a fan of... I can get rid
of header files but it is still recommended, right?

In article <44b568f1$0$20239$edfadb0f@dread16.news.tele.dk>,
wrote:

Please read about the "static" storage qualifier, and about "file scope".

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean by that. No, you shouldn't eliminate header
files. C++ has what you want with namespaces. What is "still recommended,
right"?

On 2006-07-12 23:44:41 +0200, Andrew Poelstra said:

On 2006-07-12, Lasse Espeholt wrote:

Nah; in fact, a new standard was released around 1999, and it still
isn't implemented widely because the features from 1989 are still
perfectly useful today!

C++ has namespaces. You could try over there.

If you qualify a function with `static', it isn't visible outside
of the file that it is defined in.

Lasse Espeholt writes:

I don't think there is a practical way to write large C or C++
programs without using header files. If you want to avoid header
files entirely, you'll need to move to something like C# or Java.

Lasse Espeholt said:

Fine, so don't use it. Nobody is forcing you to.

Since C doesn't have methods, the problem doesn't arise.

No thanks.

Because the language definition doesn't say it has.

Nobody is stopping you.

Lasse Espeholt said:

Then C is the wrong place to look. C has objects. So does C++, so it's no
good looking there, either.