Article author here. If you have similar pain, you can show your support for this here: <a href="http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/suggestions/2089423-c99-support" rel="nofollow">http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studi...</a><p>I know this is probably a losing battle, but I feel better at least being able to express my displeasure about the issue.
It's not that there are no alternatives..<p><a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/" rel="nofollow">http://gcc.gnu.org/</a><p><a href="http://clang.llvm.org/" rel="nofollow">http://clang.llvm.org/</a><p><a href="http://software.intel.com/en-us/intel-sdp-home/" rel="nofollow">http://software.intel.com/en-us/intel-sdp-home/</a><p><a href="http://www.pathscale.com/ekopath-compiler-suite" rel="nofollow">http://www.pathscale.com/ekopath-compiler-suite</a>
When discussing this topic, people like to say that C is more commonly used that C++. But I think that the reality is that -Microsoft's customers- use C++ much more than C. I am such a customer and in my field 95% or more of programming is C++.<p>I still wish they would support a few very basic C99 features though.
Surely Windows must use tons of C. I wonder what compiler internal devs are using. Archaic support of C seems more like a tactical choice than a laziness one in that case