Article View: comp.std.c
Article #5638Re: Re: Re: __STDC__ and non-conforming ANSI C compilers
From: Doug Gwyn
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1989 16:21
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1989 16:21
12 lines
1141 bytes
1141 bytes
In article <8792@megaron.arizona.edu> mike@arizona.edu (Mike Coffin) writes: >Now people are instead advocating setting it to 1 even if the compiler >is nonconforming, so long as the non-conformance is "minor" or >"harmless." Only in cases where NO strictly-conforming application could tell the difference. That's the only circumstance for which I think __STDC__ has a genuine use in applications. The worst effect it could have on not strictly conforming applications is that they might not try to use compatible vendor extensions since they would be led to think that they didn't exist in this environment. That doesn't bother me one bit.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9455@smoke.BRL.MIL>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwynReferences:
<9445@smoke.BRL.MIL> <8792@megaron.arizona.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Re: Re: __STDC__ and non-conforming ANSI C compilers Message-ID: <9455@smoke.BRL.MIL> Date: 20 Jan 89 16:21:43 GMT References: <9445@smoke.BRL.MIL> <8792@megaron.arizona.edu> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 12