Talk:C standard library

Remove drive-by tagging by three-edit one-day anon IP
&mdash; MaxEnt 23:46, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * "Three-edit one-day anon" isn't a valid reason (this could be anyone who edited from an uncommon location). But the fact that there's nothing clearly "misleading" and no clarification is. &mdash; Vano 00:53, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, IP addresses are human too, but the hatnote wasn't appropriate; I'd like to know what looked so misleading? &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 19:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

About subarticles (e.g. C mathematical functions)
There are links to a site called cppreference.com (and almost all subarticles has those links) and it looks like WP:SOAP and I think (for example) the link to should be replaced with  or. What do you think? --betseg (talk) 21:13, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't know the background but a quick look shows cppreference.com is pretty good. By the way, WP:SOAP is referring to advocacy (arguing, for example, in favor of a particular political outlook). I guess you are suggesting the website is being promoted (WP:PROMO). I don't know, but evidence for that would be if a small number of editors were focusing on adding that link. Issues such as whether a link is spam are normally discussed at WP:ELN whereas there might be more attention to which is the best C reference at WT:COMP, with a link to the discussion at Talk:C (programming language) and here. Johnuniq (talk) 22:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * cppreference.com is "at top" or "near top" of C function searches on google, just like Wikipedia, so they can't be all bad. I've used those links and their information is pretty good. I like how they state the section number for each C/C++ specification.  •  Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 01:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Or maybe the site is at top because Wikipedia has a lot of links to the site? That's how Google works. --betseg (talk) 05:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The engine automatically adds rel="nofollow" to every external link to prevent search engines from considering them in ranking - specifically to discourage this kind of "promotion". Though I agree that a site shall be judged solely by its content rather than position in a search result. &mdash; Vano 10:50, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I think  would be the perfect thing to use.--betseg (talk) 12:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Linking libm on linux
None of the linux distributions, over the past 18 years, I have every used, have required me to link with libm. The claim that you *must* link with -lm seems dubious if not outright wrong. Can anyone confirm that this real today? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.176.25.249 (talk) 09:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Reading the page, I believe it's only saying you need -lm if you actually use any math functions (sqrt, sin, etc.), which comports with my experience. SJFriedl (talk) 21:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * 1999 ISO C.pdf

India Education Program course assignment
This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 19:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)