C++98 is better than C++20. Upvote if you

There is an exceptional difference to be sure.

C++ has too much feature creep.

Last time I checked, when people talked about modern C++, they referred to C++14 even though C++17 was already a thing. C++20 compilers weren't really there yet but C++23 was already in the works.

all you need is c99

@nitnip I like that we are getting ranges and hopefully yield.

Shooting yourself in the foot has never been easier.

Did your post overflow because you forgot to null terminate its content?

One thing, can't you program with a C++20 compiler like its still 1998? Did they break compatibility?

I have to disagree solely because 98 doesn't have move constructors. Don't get me wrong, they are a nightmare in themselves but jesus I would not want a C++ with only copy semantics holy

@matt-jd generic macros are very useful and can avoid a lot of DRY-Violations.

@happygimp0 that’s how many cpp projects become a nightmare.
Using macros to avoid duplication is compelling but very dangerous.
You should rather use other tools like templates. If not possible without macros, maybe leave the duplication in place because it might be the lesser evil.

@Lensflare There are no Templates in C. And no, sorry, if you think about it before you code your code does not become a mess. I use generic macros in a single place: Where i convert a variable to a integer based on the type of the variable (at compile time of course) but that single place makes many other places more elegant and shorter.