Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 15:45:53 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: pst@shockwave.com, bde@freefall.freebsd.org, CVS-commiters@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-sys@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern vnode_if.sh Message-ID: <199509112245.PAA02175@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <9138.810856607@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Sep 11, 95 02:56:47 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Maybe it's time to ask the general question: > > > > Why do we care about non-ansi compilers? > > Roll back the clock about 2 years and you'll find a similar thread, except > it was me saying "Why do we care about non-ansi compilers?" that time > and Terry on the other end arguing passionately for K&R compatability > just in case we decided to do that long awated 6809 port of FreeBSD > and were stuck with pcc or something as the only available compiler. > > I say fiddlesticks - we should go to full c++ style prototypes and obey > only those sylististic conventions necessary to making things like `ctags' > work. That's about as far as I think it's necessary to go with > "backwards compatability" in source code. Then you have not thought about the facts that the BSD source code base is used in other OS's that do _not_ have a fully ansi compliant compiler and are not going to be getting one any day soon. I love the fact that I can take large hunks of BSD user land code and haul them over to my discrepent old Domain/IX SR 9.1 system and compile them up to make the system somewhat more palatable, and hell if I am going to go port gcc to this thing :-(. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509112245.PAA02175>