Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!usc!ginosko!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: quotes inside #if 0
Keywords: ANSI, comments
Message-ID: <10969@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 7 Sep 89 11:05:27 GMT
References: <2014@munnari.oz.au> <10935@smoke.BRL.MIL> <3626@yunexus.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 23

In article <3626@yunexus.UUCP> oz@yunexus.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) writes:
>In article <10935@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>>C is not WEB.
>This is extremely pompous. That peculiar (WEB-like) utilization of CPP is
>not new. It is unusable now, and all you can say is mumble about
>"tokenizing preprocessors". if you have something useful to say, why not
>say it like the respectable oldtimer you are, instead of being boorish ??

Excuse me -- I didn't realize that X3J11's printing of a bunch of pieces
of paper caused your compiler to stop accepting your already nonportable
abuse of the preprocessor.

A lot of people say "the Standard broke [whatever]".  The proposed
Standard breaks nothing.  Standard-conforming C implementations may
well not produce the same results as others have been producing, but
there has always been that degree of variation among C compilers.
The one thing the Standard does is make it simpler to assure program
portability among Standard-conforming compilers, for which the rules
are relatively clearly defined.

I think a lot of these gripes are the result of enhanced awareness
about variations in (already existing!) C environments that discussion
about the proposed Standard brings out.