Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c

["Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>]

 > From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
 > 
 > "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk> writes:
 > 
 > | On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
 > | 
 > | > Perhaps automake can help?  Does anyone think adding automake
 > | > conversion of the gcc dir and ansi2knr as two new beginner projects is
 > | > worthwhile?
 > | 
 > | ansi2knr is not a sensible road.  The benefits of using ISO C go beyond
 > | the trivial syntax changes in function declarations and definitions and
 > | keeping things limited so a converter can work is a bad idea.
 > 
 > Yeah, my "conversion" went behond mere prototyping: I made some
 > functions use and return "bool" where appropriate.
 > -- Gaby

Note using "bool" (i.e. char) in a prototype is a GCC extension, not
ISO C, and -pedantic will spank you for it.  So "bool" should never be
allowed in the core compiler (well, not until GCC crushes all
competitors. :-)

OTOH, using "bool" as a return type is fine everywhere, even right now.

		--Kaveh

PS: I agree that ansi2knr isn't good for the reasons already stated.

--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu