Pelles C versus Code::Blocks

[wallep]

Hi Members,

I am new to programming.  I have decided to learn the C language and then C++. My primary focus at this point is C.

I would like to utilize an IDE. I see two IDE's that have very good support. They are Pelles C and Code::Blocks.

Pelles C is a lite download. Only about 10 MB or so and has a great forum. Code::Blocks is a 70 MB download and has C++ as well.  Also availability for GUI programming in C++.

I'm primarily using a web site called www.cprogramming.com as a learning source as they offer many tutorials. They recommend Code::Blocks as a their IDE but I'm sure Pelles C would work as well.

Can anyone suggest which one. I understand they are both very good.

Thank you

[CommonTater]

Hi Wallep...
I've been using Pelles C for 8 years now.  I've was also a regular on cprogramming.com for a couple of years. 

So, here's how I see things...

First of all the tutorials on CProg are way too brief to be of much value as a learning tool.  They are meant as quick introductions for people who are picking up C after working in something like Java or Basic... they are not enough to properly learn the language and certainly not enough to give you a solid base in programming concepts. For that you need something far more extensive; a good book or at least an extensive online tutorial.  I generally recommend starting off with "Teach Yourself C Programming in 21 days" for a good general base, then you should follow up with Kernahan and Richie's "The C Programming language" for a more indepth understanding. Yes it means spending a bit of money... but it is well worth the money to do this right.
 
As for the best learning strategy... give THIS a read.
 
As far as IDE's are concerned, the best I can tell you is that I started on POIDE and have repeatedly gone out and looked for a better tool to use for my work.  There isn't one. If there was, I would be there. Code Blocks is bloatware that comes with the MIN-GW flavour of C++ and is missing a lot of helpful tools for Windows programming, such as resource editors, message table editor, etc.  Also be aware that MIN-GW, while a perfectly sound implementation of C is primarily intended for C++ and is thus not entirely standard C.  You want to learn C-99 and C-11 the two currently active standards (Both supported by Pelles C)... you can learn about the variants later.
 
Also, learn your way around the Pelles C help file... it's one of the best I've ever seen. All C keywords and library functions are fully documented as well as all the various aspects of the IDE and command line tools.  F1 is your friend!
 
Pelles C is an excellent C compiler. Currently there are some problems with the optimizer so, while learning, you should build your projects with Optimizations set to NONE in Project -> Project Options. I've used it for commercial as well as private software for a long time and, like the IDE, I've repeatedly looked for better without finding it.
 
There are a couple of AddIns you will find helpful in organizing and maintaining your projects. You should probably install the Workspace Manager  I wrote to provide a more flexible organization of projects and workspaces. When you get to C++ you will likely want to try the VC++ AddIn which, although not perfect is certainly enough to let you get your feet wet in the new language. There are dozens of AddIns... Installation is easy, read the FAQ.   

For CProgramming.com forums... one word: "Politics"... Programmers are pretty direct --often blunt-- people. They criticise one and other very directly, mistakes are pointed out in flat terms, bad ideas are tagged as such. But, on CProg there is a core group who basically make sure everyone either does it their way or gets picked on mercilessly... including some who carry outright prejudices about things like Windows API and C. To me this is not an atmosphere condusive to learning. It's a fiefdom. You need helpers who will be honest and direct with you about the best ways to do things and correcting your mistakes... and you should be grateful for the criticism. Don't expect that on CProg.
 
About  C++, well, what can I say? It's a different language. While the underpinnings are C the language and it's programming paradigm are totally different.  I'd suggest you spend a year or two with C, get good at it, absorb as much programming concept as you can... then move to C++ with an open mind. Comparing the two is a mistake. You'll be learning all over again.  Probably the best book for that is "Thinking In C++" Volume 1 and Volume 2 which I found to be very helpful.  Just remember, OOP in C++ is an entirely different mindset than procedural or functional languages like C... and you have to treat it as such.
 
Throughout this keep in mind that Programming is about 70% research and planning, 10% writing code and 20% fixing your own mistakes. It's not a profession for people with fragile egos or enormous pride. Coding will take that out of you in no time flat. But if you presevere and get good at it, programming and overall software development can be an extremely rewarding career or hobby... Just don't expect to do it overnight.
 
Welcome to the forums... and the coding game.

[Bitbeisser]

Well, I can wholeheartedly agree with the statements about cprogramming.com. I think this is a very bad resource, specially when interested in learning to program in C, as pretty much everything is in reference to C++ or at best C with a C++ compiler. It's very easy to pick up a lot of C++ specifics which can cause endless headaches for newbies on a plain C compiler.

On that note, people need to realize that C and C++ (and C# for that matter) are different languages, with the later having only a few basics still in common with C.

If you are in fact interested in learning C, I would strongly recommend Pelle's C, as it is a plain C compiler. But it should also be noted that it is a plain C compiler for Windows, so what works here might not work the very same way in Linux/Unix or Mac OS X...

Didn't know about Code::Blocks before, just had a brief look at it and I am less than optimistic about it. It seems to focus primarily on C++ and the GCC/MingW compiler chain, which I personally despise (YMMV). And I am not sure how up to date this is kept, even the note of their "nightly builds" doesn't look quite convincing to me. Pelle has long phases of apparent non-action only burst out with a new version to everyone's surprise...

If I had to do some C++ work in recent years, I have used Orwell's DevC++ (not the original Bloodshed DevC++, that is dead), which works actually quite nicely...

Ralf

[AlexN]

Pelles C is a lite download. Only about 10 MB or so and has a great forum. Code::Blocks is a 70 MB download and has C++ as well.  Also availability for GUI programming in C++.

If you read the forum of Code::Blocks you will see, that Code::Blocks is only an IDE. There are downloads boundled with the GNU-GCC compilers and debugger but it is only an IDE.
Pelles C is complete package with IDE, debugger, compiler, resource editor and ...

[CommonTater]

Pelles C is a lite download. Only about 10 MB or so and has a great forum. Code::Blocks is a 70 MB download and has C++ as well.  Also availability for GUI programming in C++.

If you read the forum of Code::Blocks you will see, that Code::Blocks is only an IDE. There are downloads boundled with the GNU-GCC compilers and debugger but it is only an IDE.
Pelles C is complete package with IDE, debugger, compiler, resource editor and ...

One of my big grumbles with Code::Blocks is that it comes with a bunch of pre-configured compiler setups that you cannot delete or replace... leaving you to dig through a 30 item menu when you have only 1 compiler installed.  Actually there's several cases like that, not just compilers.

Of course I have the reverse grumble with POIDE... Can't easily add more compilers...

[wallep]

Hi CommonTater,

Thank you very much for the detailed reply. I truly enjoyed reading and learning from your post. I did read your suggested thread titled, "How to learn C....so it sticks". The thread was extremely educational. It is very difficult to find such honest and flat-out 'plain vanilla' advice in regards to taking that first step.

I posted this same question on the Code::Blocks forum to be sure I'm receiving the opinions of both sides.

Perhaps I need to further explain what my programming intentions are.

I have experience in HTML and CSS web page coding albeit at a very basic level. Although this is not related to 'C' programming, it's just something I have some experience with. That's all.

Please see my most recent web page that I created.
(yes,I am a musician as well)
http://education.heliohost.org/elizabethreed/index.html
 
I am currently running four operating systems GNU/Linux (Debian), Win7, WinXP, and win2k. I'm primarily on the win7 and win2k system all day. I dual boot Win2k and Debian on the same system.

I enjoy working in windows and have for many years. My goal is to 'eventually' to be able to program in both GNU/Linux and Windows using a cross-platform IDE although using separate IDE's or compilers for both OS's is always an option. That is why I originally considered Code::Blocks which to my understanding is cross platform.

I am just learning the interface 'GNOME' on Debian and slowly learning how to maneuver around in this new environment. The programming tools for Linux are amazing from what I've read.

My search for a compiler and IDE started with this well detailed wiki page: Specifically the comparison section titled, "C/C++".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_integrated_development_environments

I have briefly used Code::Blocks and found it very helpful but would like to consider something more 'plain vanilla'. I also tend to work better in a smaller environment with a core group of people.

A hurdle with some of the bigger IDE's (for a new programmer) is that they are too good! They include most everything. I get lost wondering why I'm at a specific location accomplishing a specific task. In other words, I would like to understand the function and structure of the tool prior to programming code.

I understand that to learn some aspects of structure coding is required. However, beginning the process by following a hello-world tutorial is certainly a wonderful beginning but I would also like to learn the the tool itself (what files need to be created for a project, what the files are used for and why they are needed, what is a Bitmap, a string table, a table editor and libraries etc. etc.). I have searched google and found answers to some of my questions.

I do watch programming videos, read, study and pick up bits and pieces to help answer some of my questions.

QUESTION #1 please:
Would you recommend learning Visual Basic first prior to learning the 'C' programming language? Or do you recommend starting with the 'C' programming language immediately? I'm certainly not a complete newbie to programming but I have run across this topic from time to time.

I have also been studying Linux for the past couple of months and have finally installed my first Linux OS (distro). I am very happy to have succeeded at this. During my studies I have become fairly familiar with GNU, GCC, emacs, MinGW, wsWidgets, GTK+, etc.. However as one dreams to program on a cross-platform basis, and utilize the tools that work in both environments (Linux and windows), the setup time, configuration, familiarity of the interfaces as well as the learning curve can be quite an uphill climb.

QUESTION #2 please:
At this point, I simply prefer to 'back-up a bit' and start learning how to program in windows. That is the level I am most fluent.
 and familiar with. After all, I've been using windows since 1993. It's just where I'm at now. Also the language of 'C' doesn't change if applied to Linux or Windows. 'C' is 'C' no matter where deployed? Is this correct?

Then there's the question of "what programming architecture".  Is it Win32, .NET, wxWidgets, GTK+ on and on. It becomes daunting to someone just entering the programming field. And then there's Linux! I have briefly worked with MS Visual Basic Express 2005 and have found it to be a very helpful IDE but I wanted to learn just plain 'C'.

QUESTION #3 please:
Eventually as I become familiar with Linux and coding in both Windows and Linux, I can simultaneously work with a cross-platform IDE and learn to install GNU tools and begin to experiment. Or as I mentioned earlier, utilize separate IDE's or compilers and text editors that are geared for a specific OS and design architecture. Correct?

Many people on the Linux side are just as helpful as you have been on this thread. Complete professionals with a knack for quality advice and support.

> Code Blocks is bloatware that comes with the MIN-GW flavour of C++ and is missing a lot of
> helpful tools for Windows programming, such as resource editors, message table editor, etc.

I did read on particular forum this:

**Begin**
The big advantage of PellesC over Code::Blocks is the IDE features. If you go with Code::Blocks and MinGW you will need to find your own Resource, Dialog, Icon, Bitmap, String Table and Message Table editors, all of which are included in PellesC from the git-go. (And good luck finding a free standing Message Table editor!)
**End**

**Note**
I also read that if a programmer embeds tools such as ResEd into Code::Blocks that it can make Code::Blocks a very powerful IDE.

QUESTION #4 please:
Any opinion please on the above statements? Does it affect me at my level of experience (as in just starting to learn 'C' programming)?

> I generally recommend starting off with "Teach Yourself C Programming in 21 days" for a good > general base, then you should follow up with Kernahan and Richie's "The C Programming
> language" for a more indepth understanding.

Yes I do already own, "Teach Yourself C Programming in 21 days" but it is the 1995 'premier edition'. Not the current 6th edition. Not sure if this is a huge difference but it is a bit hard to follow but a very thick book full of info. Just not sure if it is C-99. I don't believe so as it is dated 1995.

I have also heard about, Kernahan and Richie's "The C Programming language" as well as Petzold's book on programming in windows. Thank you.

I've read much about which language is the best to start with and I was convinced (actually educated) by some articles and links that suggested 'C' is the place to start. , I have also known for years that languages written closer to machine language such as 'C' language (besides Assembly Language)  can be more powerful and stable (if correctly coded).

http://crasseux.com/books/ctutorial/Introduction.html#Introduction
http://crasseux.com/books/ctutorial/Advantages-of-C.html#Advantages%20of%20C
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Source-Language.html#Source-Language

He also promotes 'Lisp' as a language to consider as well but I don't want to get over indulged in choices. It becomes too overwhelming. To my understanding every other language -at some point- branches off 'C'.

Alex Allain's article on www.cprogramming.com was also inspiring.
http://www.cprogramming.com/whyc.html

> Also be aware that MIN-GW, while a perfectly sound implementation of C is primarily intended > for C++ and is thus not entirely standard C.  You want to learn C-99 and C-11 the two
> currently active standards (Both supported by Pelles C)... you can learn about the variants
> later.

QUESTION #5 please:
I'm glad you brought that to my attention. I did not know about certain standards such as you mentioned. I did read this article below but not sure of the date. I assume 1999 Standard C is abbreviated C-99 and 2011 Standard C is abbreviated C-11 ?  Yes, that is what I need to hear...."you can learn about the variants later."

QUESTION #6 please:
As mentioned earlier, I already own, "Teach Yourself C Programming in 21 days" but it's the 1995 'premier edition'. Not the current 6th edition. Not sure if it is C-99. Is this version still usable?

Articles I found very helpful:
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Source-Language.html#Source-Language
http://www.linfo.org/create_c1.html

I have also looked and Lcc-Win32
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32/

QUESTION #7 please:
My understanding is the compiler in Pelles C is based on Lcc albeit in a much upgraded capacity. Is Lcc-win32 still a popular program used by programmers?

> Pelles C is an excellent C compiler. Currently there are some problems with the optimizer so,
> while learning, you should build your projects with Optimizations set to NONE in Project ->
> Project Options. I've used it for commercial as well as private software for a long time and, like
> the IDE, I've repeatedly looked for better without finding it.

Ok, I will be aware of that. Thank you

> For CProgramming.com forums... one word: "Politics"... Programmers are pretty direct --often > blunt-- people. They criticise one and other very directly, mistakes are pointed out in flat
> terms, bad ideas are tagged as such.

Fully aware. Thank you

> But, on CProg there is a core group who basically make sure everyone either does it their way > or gets picked on mercilessly... including some who carry outright prejudices about things like > Windows API and C. To me this is not an atmosphere condusive to learning.

Yes I understand. I try to ignore it, learn what I can and move on.

> It's a fiefdom.

Now there's a new word!  Fiefdom  - Something over which one dominant person or group exercises control.

> You need helpers who will be honest and direct with you about the best ways to do things
> and correcting your mistakes... and you should be grateful for the criticism.

Yes, I understand. In my experience, I find there exists those who are true professionals who help build-up your self-esteem and your character to think a problem through and conquer it. They are the best support that one can experience.

> About  C++, well, what can I say? It's a different language. While the underpinnings are C the > language and it's programming paradigm are totally different.

QUSTION #8 please:
The reason for C++ (I thought), was to create GUI programs.  Apparently GUI programs can be constructed using 'C'  but at a more difficult level ?

> I'd suggest you spend a year or two with C, get good at it, absorb as much programming
> concept as you can... then move to C++ with an open mind. Comparing the two is a mistake.
> You'll be learning all over again. 

Question #9 please:
Ok, thank you. Is there any advantage to knowing 'C' prior to learning C++? I read opposing views on this.

> Throughout this keep in mind that Programming is about 70% research and planning, 10%
> writing code and 20% fixing your own mistakes.

Now that's an eye-opener!

Thank you very much

[wallep]

Hi Bitbeisser,

> It's very easy to pick up a lot of C++ specifics which can cause endless headaches for newbies
> on a plain C compiler.

Ok, that is good to know.

> If you are in fact interested in learning C, I would strongly recommend Pelle's C, as it is a plain
>  C compiler. But it should also be noted that it is a plain C compiler for Windows, so what
> works here might not work the very same way in Linux/Unix or Mac OS X...

That is OK. I'm simply looking to begin the process of learning to code in 'C'. Coding in Linux can begin at a later point and with different tools if need be.

> Didn't know about Code::Blocks before, just had a brief look at it and I am less than optimistic > about it. It seems to focus primarily on C++ and the GCC/MingW compiler chain,.......

Question please:
The whole C and C++ combination in a compiler is actually confusing me. If a compiler is written in C++ and compiles in C code then what is the difference as oppose to a compiler written in C that compiles C code ?

I'm sure they are fine to the experienced programmers who are familiar with their quirks (if any) but I'd much prefer to work -at the very least- in a pure 'C' environment and simply begin the learning process.

Thank you for helping.

[wallep]

If you read the forum of Code::Blocks you will see, that Code::Blocks is only an IDE. There are downloads boundled with the GNU-GCC compilers and debugger but it is only an IDE.
Pelles C is complete package with IDE, debugger, compiler, resource editor and ...

Hi Alex,

That is good to know. Thank you.

Question please:
I guess my first clarification is to further understand what components are included in a software developers tool kit that would classify this toolkit as an IDE or simply as separate tools?

Or rather, how does a 'feature rich' IDE compare to a 'no-frills' IDE and then comparing both to utilizing separate tools such as a separate text editor (i.e. notepad++) and a separate compiler. This is the most confusing part when beginning the process of learning how to program (when initially searching for tools or a pkg. that contains a combination of tools).

I did read this and found it very helpful:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_development_environment

Thank you Alex

[wallep]

Hi CommonTater,

One of my big grumbles with Code::Blocks is that it comes with a bunch of pre-configured compiler setups that you cannot delete or replace... leaving you to dig through a 30 item menu when you have only 1 compiler installed.  Actually there's several cases like that, not just compilers.

Yes I did see the long list of choices in Code::Blocks when I compiled some basic 'newbie' test programs. However it was not a problem for me when I was trying it for the first time. If I remember correctly, the default compiler I utilized always appeared at the top of the list. But then again, I was using the latest version 10.05.

Thank you CommonTater

[Bitbeisser]

But, on CProg there is a core group who basically make sure everyone either does it their way > or gets picked on mercilessly... including some who carry outright prejudices about things like > Windows API and C. To me this is not an atmosphere condusive to learning.

It's a fiefdom.

Of course, what he neglects to mention is the reason he hates cprogramming.com, and that's because the "do it my way or be criticised" mob largely consisted of himself. When he couldn't peddle his misinformation and bad techniques onto people who didn't know better without being pulled up on it by people who did, he proceeded to threaten the members and was summarily banned. But then again, I'm sure he'll say it wasn't him despite the astronomical odds of two Canadians called ******* (google it for some hilariousness) each choosing the same forum user name.

I have never posted on that forum and in general can only concur to his assessment of cprogramming.com overall.

And it looks you fared at least as bad as he did if not for worse. And there is no reason, what so ever, to do what he already mentioned over there that you come in here now and keep stalking him. Please consider yourself warned...

Ralf

[CommonTater]

I enjoy working in windows and have for many years. My goal is to 'eventually' to be able to program in both GNU/Linux and Windows using a cross-platform IDE although using separate IDE's or compilers for both OS's is always an option. That is why I originally considered Code::Blocks which to my understanding is cross platform.

Worry first about learning programming _at all_.  A lot of the basics work everywhere, what you will need when you start cross-platform work is the differences, and those you can pick up later.

Would you recommend learning Visual Basic first prior to learning the 'C' programming language? Or do you recommend starting with the 'C' programming language immediately? I'm certainly not a complete newbie to programming but I have run across this topic from time to time.

No. It's a completely different scenario, again. All you're going to do is confuse yourself.
 
Pick a language and master it.  Then you can think about your next step... As they say on the watermellon farm: "One at a time is good picking".
 

 At this point, I simply prefer to 'back-up a bit' and start learning how to program in windows. That is the level I am most fluent.
 and familiar with. After all, I've been using windows since 1993. It's just where I'm at now. Also the language of 'C' doesn't change if applied to Linux or Windows. 'C' is 'C' no matter where deployed? Is this correct?

The language is the same, but the methodology is quite different under *nix systems... Starting with windows humble little console is a good way to learn.  Later you can look at the differences, as I mentioned above.
 

Then there's the question of "what programming architecture".  Is it Win32, .NET, wxWidgets, GTK+ on and on

.
 
At the risk of bringing another screaming idiot over here... Stick with C and Windows API at first. 
 
The big laugh is that GTK, WX etc. at some level all have to communicate with windows through it's API... it's kinda like driving from Chicago to New York on your way to LA.
 

Eventually as I become familiar with Linux and coding in both Windows and Linux, I can simultaneously work with a cross-platform IDE and learn to install GNU tools and begin to experiment. Or as I mentioned earlier, utilize separate IDE's or compilers and text editors that are geared for a specific OS and design architecture. Correct?

That is going to depend almost entirely on what you are doing... Experience will guide you.
 

The big advantage of PellesC over Code::Blocks is the IDE features. If you go with Code::Blocks and MinGW you will need to find your own Resource, Dialog, Icon, Bitmap, String Table and Message Table editors, all of which are included in PellesC from the git-go. (And good luck finding a free standing Message Table editor!)

Now that's funny... go back over to (you know where) and take a look who wrote that!
 

Any opinion please on the above statements? Does it affect me at my level of experience (as in just starting to learn 'C' programming)?

Simple answer... don't be a scatterbrain.  Concentrate on learning the language and basic programming skills. Worry about the rest of it later.  A Big plan is nothing but a whole slew of little plans executed sequentially.
 

I'm glad you brought that to my attention. I did not know about certain standards such as you mentioned. I did read this article below but not sure of the date. I assume 1999 Standard C is abbreviated C-99 and 2011 Standard C is abbreviated C-11 ?

Nope... I have no idea where they get the numbers from but it's not related to dates.  (Or if it is these guys are sure as shootin' slow on the uptake, since C-99 wasn't widely adopted until about 2006.)
 

 As mentioned earlier, I already own, "Teach Yourself C Programming in 21 days" but it's the 1995 'premier edition'. Not the current 6th edition. Not sure if it is C-99. Is this version still usable?

It'll get you started... but be sure to work the the Pelles helpfile to find the areas where what it teaches may be superceded or non-standard C.
 

My understanding is the compiler in Pelles C is based on Lcc albeit in a much upgraded capacity. Is Lcc-win32 still a popular program used by programmers?

Yes and no... It's still available, but I have no idea how many people are using it.
 

> It's a fiefdom.
Now there's a new word!  Fiefdom  - Something over which one dominant person or group exercises control.

And today you met the Sherrif.
 

The reason for C++ (I thought), was to create GUI programs.  Apparently GUI programs can be constructed using 'C'  but at a more difficult level ?

I don't find it all that difficult... just voluminous... but then you adopt the strategy of knowing how to look stuff up when you need it. With 20,000+ functions in the API no one person has any hope of remembering even a significant part of it. Just know where to find the info when you need it.

Ok, thank you. Is there any advantage to knowing 'C' prior to learning C++? I read opposing views on this.

Probably not.  They are different languages.  I think the reason so many people suggest one over the other is the same reason why some like Chocolate and others like Strawberry.

[Bitbeisser]

I'm glad you brought that to my attention. I did not know about certain standards such as you mentioned. I did read this article below but not sure of the date. I assume 1999 Standard C is abbreviated C-99 and 2011 Standard C is abbreviated C-11 ?

Nope... I have no idea where they get the numbers from but it's not related to dates.  (Or if it is these guys are sure as shootin' slow on the uptake, since C-99 wasn't widely adopted until about 2006.)

Sorry Tater, but wallep is basically right, it's the year of the release of the respective C standard.
 C99 refers to ISO/IEC 9899:1999 and C11 refers to ISO/IEC 9899:2011.

Ralf

[CommonTater]

The whole C and C++ combination in a compiler is actually confusing me. If a compiler is written in C++ and compiles in C code then what is the difference as oppose to a compiler written in C that compiles C code ?

At the bottom of it, it's all machine code... registers and opcodes.

However; to get certain things to work properly in C++ they had to change the underlying C language a fair bit, leaving you with incompatibities that are not always obvious.  (Google is your friend on this one!)

[CommonTater]

Sorry Tater, but wallep is basically right, it's the year of the release of the respective C standard.
 C99 refers to ISO/IEC 9899:1999 and C11 refers to ISO/IEC 9899:2011.

Hi Ralf ...  Yeah I sorta knew that but the slow uptake thing does make me wonder.   
Mostly I was trying to inject just a bit of humour into an already messed up situation.

Sorry if it didn't come out that way...

[Bitbeisser]

Sorry Tater, but wallep is basically right, it's the year of the release of the respective C standard.
 C99 refers to ISO/IEC 9899:1999 and C11 refers to ISO/IEC 9899:2011.

Hi Ralf ...  Yeah I sorta knew that but the slow uptake thing does make me wonder.   
Mostly I was trying to inject just a bit of humour into an already messed up situation.

Sorry if it didn't come out that way...

Just wanted to stick to the facts... 

Slow uptake or not, IMHO, as I mentioned in a previous thread regarding this issue, I don't really consider anything in C99 or C11 a real worthwhile improvement over older "ANSI C" (aka as ANSI X3.159-1989/ISO/IEC 9899:1990, aka C89/C90).
A bit tighter typing maybe and the use of "//" style comments...

Ralf