Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!rutgers!mit-eddie!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Reality check (Was Re: prototypes required ?)
Message-ID: <14199@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 19 Oct 90 19:27:40 GMT
References: <1061@dg.dg.com> <1171@dms.UUCP>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 15

In article <1171@dms.UUCP> albaugh@dms.UUCP (Mike Albaugh) writes:
>	And neither will vast quantities of old code, which are used to
>"rolling their own" varargs routines.

That never was a very wise practice, and <varargs.h> was devised LONG AGO
to provide portable support for such situations.  I lost track of how
many thousands of lines of other people's source code I have had to
change to use <varargs.h> when porting to an environment different from
the model that they assumed when they "rolled their own" variable-
argument code.

I expect most conforming implementations to also provide <varargs.h> as
a convenience for their customers, although some may well require the
extra hooks that the standard provides and thus really not be able to
implement <varargs.h>, only <stdarg.h>.