Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!xanth!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: This one bit me today
Message-ID: <1949@xyzzy.UUCP>
Date: 18 Oct 89 21:07:34 GMT
References: <2432@hub.UUCP> <568@sppy00.UUCP> <750@philmtl.philips.ca> <4147@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> <267@wsl.UUCP> <244@bbxsda.UUCP> <1901@xyzzy.UUCP> <255@bbxsda.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@xyzzy.UUCP
Reply-To: goudreau@rtp48.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC
Lines: 26

In article <255@bbxsda.UUCP> scott@bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker) writes:
>In article <1901@xyzzy.UUCP> goudreau@rtp48.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes:
> >In article <244@bbxsda.UUCP> scott@bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker) writes:
> >>
> >>Another easy pitfall in C is forgetting to close a comment.  On compilers
> >>that don't nest comments this will cause some code to be swallowed up
> >
> >Any compiler that allows nesting of comments isn't a C compiler anyway,
> >by either K&R or ANSI standards.
>
>Believe it or not - that is a command line switch on some C compilers.

My point was that any such compilers (or compiler-instantiations created
by invoking the same program with different switches) may *claim* to be
C compilers, but claiming isn't enough.  Such compilers are *broken*, at
least as C compilers.  Now if they advertised themselves as compilers
for a language that's sort of like (but not really) C, then that's
another story.  But if they're going to monkey with fundamental parts
of the language definition (and yes, the language definition includes
preprocessor directives) in their compiler, who's to say what else
they'll break?

-----------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau				+1 919 248 6231
Data General Corporation		...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau
62 Alexander Drive			goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA