From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Apr 14 16:10:06 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id QAA12050 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:10:06 -0700 Received: from hda.com (hda.com [199.232.40.182]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA12044 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 16:10:02 -0700 Received: (dufault@localhost) by hda.com (8.6.9/8.3) id TAA03606; Fri, 14 Apr 1995 19:09:27 -0400 From: Peter Dufault Message-Id: <199504142309.TAA03606@hda.com> Subject: 90's compilers To: joerg@freefall.cdrom.com (Joerg Wunsch) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 19:09:26 -0400 (EDT) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199504142126.OAA07587@freefall.cdrom.com> from "Joerg Wunsch" at Apr 14, 95 02:26:56 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 868 Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Joerg Wunsch writes: > > o Moved all external declarations to boot.h, declared all functions > there, and ANSIfied all function declarations/definitions. > (printf() remains bogus, however -- i'm too lazy to fix this.) > We're in the ninetees, dunno why we should still support compilers > from the 70's. If you're proposing changing the coding guidelines away from KNF on this I'm all for it. In the last year I've worked with two DSPs and a 64K address space microcontroller and all have had halfway decent ANSI compilers. I can't imagine what we would ever port to that wouldn't have a decent compiler - I wouldn't choose a microcontroller compiler that didn't support Standard C. -- Peter Dufault Real Time Machine Control and Simulation HD Associates, Inc. Voice: 508 433 6936 dufault@hda.com Fax: 508 433 5267