Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcnc!borg!hatteras!morse
From: morse@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Bryan Morse)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Programming Style
Message-ID: <3264@borg.cs.unc.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 16:55:08 GMT
References: <1991Apr16.154655.14204@hellgate.utah.edu> <28721:Apr1701:15:3791@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Sender: news@cs.unc.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 21

In article <28721:Apr1701:15:3791@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>In article <1991Apr16.154655.14204@hellgate.utah.edu> u-beasth%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Bryant Eastham) writes:
>> When
>> the standard says that system headers may be included multiple times then
>> write code as though they can.
>
>For code that you distribute or plan to port to future systems, you
>should never make an assumption like that. 

Then why even have a standard in the first place?  

The general opinion has often surfaced here that, "Well, it may be in the
standard, but if you do it it won't be portable."  Huh???  I realize that
it takes time for a standard to emerge and that compliance is optional,
but does that mean we should continue to write every C program according
to K&R Edition 1, First printing?  Never use enums, never use prototypes,
never use voids, never return structures...

-- 
Bryan Morse                University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
morse@cs.unc.edu           Department of Computer Science