This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C/C++ on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.C/C++Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++Template:WikiProject C/C++C/C++ articles
C (programming language) has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Technology. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.
C (programming language) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Pass-by-reference is simulated in C by explicitly passing pointer values.
'Pointer values' is specifically ambiguous. Suggest 'addresses' instead. Also: 'pass-by-reference' seems new. The accepted terms are 'call by reference' and 'call by value' (with a third method unused but for Algol - 'call by name'). Also: it's not really 'simulated' either, is it? It's done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brett Alexander Hunter (talk • contribs) 01:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I started to revise the text about arrays because it was outdated, slightly incorrect, and partially misleading. (As background info: I am a member of the ISO working group for C and contributor to GCC.) Martin.uecker (talk) 08:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Chumpih: I don't think MOS:TERM applies to this edit. It says A technical or other jargon term being introduced is often being mentioned as a word rather than (or in addition to) playing its normal grammatical role, but in this case it is neither a technical term (rather, it is a proper name) nor is it being mentioned as a word. If the name of the language were 'Python' rather than 'B' I doubt anyone would write "A successor to the programming language Python". Ruбlov (talk • contribs) 15:25, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Rublov, Given these are the introductions of the terms, as opposed to references to the terms, perhaps the italicisation is warranted. Chumpiht 15:41, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, on further consideration, you're probably right. Apologies. Chumpiht 16:00, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a good reason why the opening paragraph starts with “commonly in …” then one “decreasingly in …” then more “commonly in …”? I found this order slightly confusing. Osalbahr (talk) 01:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's likely imperfect, as you identify. WP:DIY. Then perhaps WP:BRD or perhaps subsequent changes if your edits don't quite hit the mark. Chumpiht 21:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
