Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!uw-june!pardo
From: pardo@uw-june.UUCP (David Keppel)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: (So-Called) ANSI C
Message-ID: <3873@uw-june.UUCP>
Date: 21 Dec 87 01:17:30 GMT
References: <4668@pyr.gatech.EDU>
Reply-To: pardo@uw-june.UUCP (David Keppel)
Organization: U of Washington, Computer Science, Seattle
Lines: 22



>From: roy@pyr.gatech.EDU (Roy Mongiovi)
>I thought the purpose of X3J11 was to standardize on the existing
>C language.  It seems to me, however, that so many old twists have
>been removed, so many new wrinkles have been added, and so many
>existing C programs broken by the so-called standard that it is
>no longer the same language.
>
>It may have a lot of nice, perhapes even needed features, but
>(in my opinion) it just ain't C.
>
>Comments anyone?
--
Agree.

This is why I think pragmas are a better mechanism for doing things like
``noalias'', etc.  I'm now a little bothered that the debate over whether
to have ``noalias'' rages on yet nobody has talked about leaving the
language alone and using pragmas to get the optimizations...

	;-D on  (The San Francisco Treat)  Pardo