Made with KolourPaint and screenshots from Kate (with the GitHub theme).
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
90 points (86.3% liked)
Programmer Humor
36648 readers
288 users here now
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
- Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
- No NSFW content.
- Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To be honest I always disliked variable declaration without value assignment, so to me both options suck. :)
What about you declare (then it gets allocated in stack) it and pass it to a different context for assignment?
Well, I don't know your use case well enough, but I guess you might have perfect reason for that behavior.
One thing that comes to my mind is the old Try in C#
But I guess more popular approach would be to use Error as Values, right?
E.g. something like this
Great example.
Wouldn't
getchar()be more appropriate here? Last time I used C it was 16 years ago.Yes, and no, sir, you missed the point. The procedure here is to allocate then give away, not reading a fixed-length returned value.
Say you can only afford to have ten bytes in the stack. You allocate
char s[10];then give it to a library to parse something. Also telling it to abort if it's going to be longer than ten bytes, of course.