Wikipedia talk:WikiProject C/C++

Articles as manual pages, or miniature tutorials?

I see a number of articles related to C/C++ that are tutorials. For example, there is an article on stdarg.h which provides implementation instructions. Numerous code samples -- the entire standard library article series is written like this. Is this good for Wikipedia, to be partial, second-class documentation? A third-rate tutorial site? I don't understand the motive for including all this information in an encyclopedia. I know people are passionate about the language, but these articles are clearly beyond casual encyclopedic interest. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOT#GUIDE -- thoughts?

I propose to eliminate or merge a large number of these library pages, without the code samples they're nothing but stubs. 75.119.90.35 (talk) 18:13, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

C++0x still cited widely

You guys are probably aware of this already, but I have noticed that many C++ and general computer programming articles still refer to C++0x as an upcoming standard, rather than to C++11 adopted in August of this year. Is there any organized effort to fix that or do we just let it trickle in? TiC (talk) 15:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

• I think that renaming effort is needed. C++0x is a history now. It should be explained what is that in the main C++ article. Everywhere else the C++11 should be used. Code-Analysis (talk) 12:31, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

for loop image

Hi. I have found this image : File:C language for.png . Is it bad image ? ( increment should be done also after last check of condition ) Am I right ? Regards --Adam majewski (talk) 09:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Help with C++ Wikibook[1]

Hello all! I’m working with the Saylor foundation to create a series of original, crowd-sourced textbooks that will be openly licensed and freely available on the web and within Saylor’s free, self-paced courses at Saylor.org. We are using Wikibooks as a platform to host this project and hope to garner the interest of existing members of the Wikibooks and Wikipedia community, as well as bring in new members! We thought that some of your members may be interested in contributing to our book Saylor.Org's C++ Programming [2].(talk) --Thomas Simpson (talk) 17:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C++ grammar

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C++ grammar. FYI, —Ruud 22:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Request for comments: Establish standards for version history tables in software articles

I'd like to introduce the Template:Version template to Wikipedia with the goal to establish one standard for version history tables (or lists). It simplifies creation of release histories, standardizes release stages and makes the content more accessible. Please comment on the template talk page (there already is some discussion). Thanks for your contribution. Jesus Presley (talk) 07:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

---

Wikipedia:WikiProject C++ → Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++ – On 11 March 2006,‎ Deryck Chan (talk · contribs) moved Wikipedia:WikiProject C to Wikipedia:WikiProject C++. His reason Move the inactive project to a better location and get a fresh restart.

I disagree that "...C++" is a better location.

• If this WikiProject is truly supposed to cover both C and C++, Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++ is more appropriate.
• C++ is an extremely close relative of C, not its successor. Referring to both under either name is incorrect and misleading to perspective participants.
• "C/C++" is the commonly used term for referring both simultaneously.
• Wikipedia:WikiProject C and Wikipedia:WikiProject C++ should both redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++.
  • C and C++ articles then can be easily differentiated with {{WPBannerMeta}}'s task force categorizations (one for each).

—Sowlos 13:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

• Support though perhaps it would be better to cover cshell, tcsh, C# and Java and ECMAscript (JS) as well, in a unified C/C++/C#/Java/JS project? -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
• Support Makes sense. —Ruud 00:11, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Member list

At some point, a few plain text names were included in the list of participants. I tried searching the names but cannot connect them to any existing Wikipedia accounts. As far as I can tell, they may be the names of three unregistered people.

Before simply removing them, I'm wondering if anyone knows who they might be.
—Sowlos 11:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Needs help

I wrote an article about a C++ book C++ Primer, but it was speedily deleted as advertisement. I hope some one would be able to help. Here is the deletion review. --HNAKXR (talk) 02:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

C++ Compilers

Computers understand only one language and that language consists of sets of instructions made of ones and zeros. This computer language is appropriately called machine language. A single instruction in computer might look like this: 0000 0001 (Binary Numbers)

A particular computer's machine language program that allows a user to input two numbers, adds the two numbers together and displays the total could include these machine code instructions: 00000 10011110 00001 11110100 00010 10011110 00011 11010100 00100 10111111 00101 00000000

As you can imagine, programming a computer directly in machine language using only ones and zeros is very tedious and error prone. To make programming easier, high level languages have been developed. High level programs also make it easier for programmers to inspect and understand each other's programs easier.

This is a portion of code written in C++ that accomplishes the exact same purpose:

int a, b, sum;

cin >> a; cin >> b;

sum = a + b; cout << sum << endl;

Even if you cannot really understand the code above, you should be able to appreciate how much easier it will be to program in the C++ language as opposed to machine language.

Because a computer can only understand machine language and humans wish to write in high level languages high level languages have to be re-written (translated) into machine language at some point. This is done by special programs called compilers, interpreters, or assemblers that are built into the various programming applications.

C++ is designed to be a compiled language, meaning that it is generally translated into machine language that can be understood directly by the system, making the generated program highly efficient. For that, a set of tools are needed, known as the development tool chain, whose core are a compiler and its linker.

14.96.222.110 (talk) 18:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure why the above was added to the talk page, but it is nice tutorial that probably belongs in an article (with a bit or rewording and some minor editing, such as my change of "is" to "might").Tripodics (talk) 16:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

It is unclear to me whether there has been any recent activity on this project. If there is some work to do, I'm willing to help out, but don't know how to participate.Tripodics (talk) 16:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Why are C and C++ placed within a single project

Why are C and C++ placed within a single project? Martinkunev (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Just for the historical record: the answer is literally a few sections above this one: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject C/C++#Requested_move --DanielPharos (talk) 23:47, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion at C18 (C standard revision)

Watchers of this page may be interested in the move discussion at Talk:C18_(C_standard_revision)#Requested_move_26_October_2020, regarding whether the WP:COMMONNAME of the current C standard revision is C17 or C18. - Astrophobe (talk) 21:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is Barton–Nackman trick marked as "Start-Class"?

Hi,

I've carefully re-read Barton–Nackman trick (to which I had contributed many years ago) and it doesn't seem to lack anything important. I'd rate it as at least B-Class. Is there any particular reason why it is marked as a Start-Class article, instead? —Gennaro Prota^•Talk 09:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Adoption

I'd like to adopt this WikiProject. If there are no objections, I'll adopt this WikiProject in a week. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Seeing as this topic received no responses, I'll adopt the project anyway. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Associative containers#Requested move 26 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Associative containers#Requested move 26 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 19:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC)