From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Feb 5 21:24:40 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA25529 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 21:24:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pau-amma.whistle.com (s205m64.whistle.com [207.76.205.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA25522 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 21:24:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dhw@whistle.com) Received: (from dhw@localhost) by pau-amma.whistle.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA06588 for Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 21:23:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dhw) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 21:23:11 -0800 (PST) From: David Wolfskill Message-Id: <199902060523.VAA06588@pau-amma.whistle.com> Subject: Re: C headers Cc: Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199902060201.TAA25935@usr02.primenet.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >From: Terry Lambert >Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 02:01:55 +0000 (GMT) >So the fact that you will potentially get undetectable errors if >you compile without a prototype in scope can really be blamed on >lazy compiler writers who didn't want to update their linker >technology at the same time that they were adding assumptions to >their compiler. The presumption (in the above) that the compiler writers were necessarily in a position to exert a useful form of influence over those who implemented linker technology is not always warranted for the universe of systems that was the domain of the ANSI C committee. Indeed: sometimes, they were competitors. david -- David Wolfskill UNIX System Administrator dhw@whistle.com voice: (650) 577-7158 pager: (650) 371-4621 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message