Newsgroups: comp.std.c Path: utzoo!henry From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: Reserved names in ANSI C Message-ID: <1989Jul2.212700.15597@utzoo.uucp> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology References: <13680@haddock.ima.isc.com> <1598@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> <875@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> <316@mountn.dec.com> <884@cbnewsl.ATT.COM> <321@mountn.dec.com> <461@algor2.UUCP> <1989Jul1.234330.28732@utzoo.uucp> <3364@buengc.BU.EDU> Date: Sun, 2 Jul 89 21:27:00 GMT In article <3364@buengc.BU.EDU> bph@buengc.bu.edu (Blair P. Houghton) writes: >>Any linker that supports the bare minimum for FORTRAN. There are more >>such linkers in the world than you'd think. > >Which begs the question: how difficult is it to have standard-conforming >implementations implement a linker that handles a larger name space? Potentially very difficult if you have to convince the supplier to support two different object-module formats. Please, folks, let us not get into a long debate about this one again. The facts are: 1. Some suppliers are not willing to do it immediately. 2. X3J11 is not in the business of legislating morality; its job is to produce a standard that will be accepted and followed widely. In the real world, this sometimes requires temporary concessions to badly-designed but widespread existing software. 3. This particular concession *is* temporary; the draft standard contains an explicit warning that it is likely to go away in future. -- $10 million equals 18 PM | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology (Pentagon-Minutes). -Tom Neff | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu