The Descent to C (2013)

The article is good, but I disagree with this part: "To a large extent, the answer is: C is that way because reality is that way. C is a low-level language, which means that the way things are done in C is very similar to the way they're done by the computer itself. If you were writing machine code, you'd find that most of the discussion above was just as true as it is in C: strings really are very…

> (In fact, that's what array[i] means – the language defines it to be a synonym for *(array+i).) To really drive home the primitiveness of C arrays, should probably also mention that, because addition is commutative, you could also write i[array] and somewhat surprisingly, it will compile, and work, and it means "*(i + array)" which is equivalent to "*(array + i)" But nobody really does that, because that would be kind of insane.

> So, how do you solve problems in C that users of other languages would do with classes? One very common pattern in C is just to do the same thing unofficially. I started programming before OOP was widespread and I remember when I first had to use it. I put all my code into a single class which had a single instance. However, I feel that it's the other way round now. People have programming with classes so ingrained…