Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!udel!gatech!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!throopw
From: throopw@xyzzy.UUCP (Wayne A. Throop)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: (So-Called) ANSI C
Message-ID: <495@xyzzy.UUCP>
Date: 22 Dec 87 17:52:53 GMT
References: <4668@pyr.gatech.EDU>
Organization: Data General, RTP NC.
Lines: 21

> roy@pyr.gatech.EDU (Roy Mongiovi)
> 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.

I agree that many new, and in some cases ugly, wrinkles have been added.
But what old twists have been removed?  What substantial cases of
existing programs being broken are there?  There are many common coding
practices that the standard makes clear are dangerous and non-portable,
but for the most part these were already de-facto dangerous and
non-portable.

In other words, give me some example of "existing C programs broken" by
the draft standard.  I'm not aware of any interesting cases.

--
A class made up solely of intellectuals
will always have a guilty conscience.
        --- Robert Anton Wilson in "The Universe Next Door"
-- 
Wayne Throop      <the-known-world>!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!throopw