Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!unixhub!shelby!msi-s0.msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!sialis!quad!dts From: dts@quad.sialis.mn.org (David T. Sandberg) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Seven Original Sins of K&R (Long) Message-ID: <608@quad.sialis.mn.org> Date: 3 Oct 90 08:01:13 GMT References: <1990Oct2.040019.1635@ccu.umanitoba.ca> Reply-To: dts@quad.sialis.mn.org (David T. Sandberg) Organization: Quadric Systems, Richfield MN Lines: 16 In article <1990Oct2.040019.1635@ccu.umanitoba.ca> salomon@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Dan Salomon) writes: >Much more code is going to be written in C than currently exists. >Should we sacrifice all the code to come for the sake of the existing >code? Apples and oranges. Maintaining backward compatibility doesn't "sacrifice" all future code... it just means that you can't have every toy construct you may want. That in and of itself doesn't prevent you from using the language, and is not nearly so serious as the problems that would be caused by breaking most every bit of existing code (a real, quantifiable sacrifice). -- \\ David Sandberg \ ,=, ,=, \\ // dts@quad.sialis.mn.org / | |uadric '=,ystems // \\ uunet!rosevax!sialis!quad!dts \ '=\ `=' \\