DDraceNetwork - developer

after ddnet update some demos disappeared i cutted 1 month ago, did this happen to anyone else?

@Brokecdx- do you have a limit to the number of demos set?

08:24

If so, the most recent ddnet version correctly deletes them while the old one had multiple bugs around this

@deen no it's set on unlimited

Servercompass offers good ddos protections or is planning to do so

11:05

as far as i know @Deleted User (bombay) used it effectifly agianst daily blocker ddos

11:06

oh btw does any1 know what @heinrich5991 is talking about

11:12

oh and nvm the ddos protection probably i was missinformed a bit.

capital S in seconds

ah

11:51

sänks @Deleted User

why are we even compiling system.c as C90???

12:38

What is this? 1989?

why not xd

12:39

why even c is the question

12:39

c++ allows alot more xD

No compound literals, no vlas, no single line comments, no middle of block declarations, no declaration in for initialization

12:40

Any other reason needed not to use C90 in 2019?

c++11 -> threads

I guess it might be useful if someone wants to compile teeworlds for their PDP-7...

i think(thought) ddnet already decided to use c++11 (edited)

doubt we'd ever compile system.c with a c++ compiler

yeah rename to .cpp and allow c++11 features ^^

C89/90 is not a subset of C++11

12:53

Might need some fixing

maybe yes :D, but i think not huge things mostly casting issues probably

12:54

i mean system.c is mostly a wrapper only anyway

god damn c++11, "ISO C++ forbids converting a string constant to 'char*" Who tf decides these things...

12:56

That's it, I'm migrating to brainfuck, I'll be explicitly coding in brainfuck from now on

well i think it makes sense in some way

char *p = "test"; That not working makes sense to you?

yes

12:57

bcs the string is stored in some tables in the exe under windows

It was fine until C++03. Besides no matter where you store it that string is going to take 5 bytes, why put it in some platform dependant place anyways?

i think their main intention is to have it declearable as non modifable memory

12:59

like read only

Anyways, that's not why they made the change, the standard says it's because string literals are supposed to be const char *, which makes sense, however breaking existing code for something like that is imho stupid

yeah dunno, i was born with c++11 stuff, so i don't know different really xD

Maybe I should just use javascript for everything where types don't matter, argument counts dont matter and the standard is barely a suggestion

xD

Learath2

[ddnet/ddnet] Issue opened: #1444 Upgrading system.c

We are compiling system.c with C90 for some reason. Should we maybe start compiling it with C99 or replace it with a system.cpp(C++11)?

@Learath2 can't use something newer than c90 with msvc

14:52

I think it makes sense to have string literals be const char * and not allow to convert const pointers to non-const ones implicity

14:52

implicitly*

god damn microsoft, they are all just trying to drive me insane todday

15:09

@heinrich5991 it makes sense, I agree. Causing a breaking change for it is just not worth it after decades of people using it in code