Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gcc-opus.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!gcc-opus!brad
From: brad@gcc-opus.ARPA (Brad Parker)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: 6 char externs and the ANSI standard
Message-ID: <122@gcc-opus.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 8-Nov-84 13:52:13 EST
Article-I.D.: gcc-opus.122
Posted: Thu Nov  8 13:52:13 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 10-Nov-84 04:51:44 EST
References: <1802@pegasus.UUCP> <237@uf-csg.UUCP>
Reply-To: brad@gcc-opus.UUCP (Brad Parker)
Organization: General Computer Company, Cambridge Ma (creators of Ms. Pacman)
Lines: 17
Summary: 

In article <237@uf-csg.UUCP> ralph@uf-csg.UUCP (Ralph Kuntz) flames (-::
>Come on folks!!  Let's move out of the ``stone-age'' of compilers.  The
>proposed standard allows 6 mono-case characters for externs.  If a program is
>to comform to the standard it too cannot depend on more than 6 significant
>characters.  The alternative is to allow an `unlimited' number of significant
>characters, ala 4.2bsd C, and bring all of the out-of-date loaders into the
>'80s.  Writing compiler-assemblers is no longer the chore it used to be.
>Loader technology should also be brought up to date.
>-- 

I'd have to agree with this. After a very painfull port of "portable" C code
from WhiteSmith's C on one machine (Z-80) to Whitesmith's C on a PDP-11
running RSTS (rat-sh*t time sharing), and discovering that the linker only
accepted symbol of 6 chars or less, I have paid my dues. Moving from 8
or more significant chars in an external symbol to 6 can cause premature
balding. This is a special case, I realize, but one that should be concidered
before adopting a standard.