Re: Convert 3.2 sources to ISO C90

[Marc Espie <espie at nerim dot net>]

On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 06:05:20AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> It's not at all clear to me that Jeff would have to do anything
> because of the switch.  In fact, what I've heard so far is that
> the status quo involves extra work for each release, clearing
> out ISOisms in the code.

And clearing out ISOisms in the code is something that is done by
people who need it to compile on K&R compilers, is it not ?

So, they have an interest in cleaning that up, don't they ?

At a guess, I'm sure it always goes like that: some of those people
sends along a patch to clean up some ISOism, plus a recommendation that
says `don't do that, it's not K&R'.

Are there really many cases where cleaning up ISOisms has been more
than just cleaning up ISOisms, e.g., actually requiring changes to the
structure.

At a guess again, I want tend to say that any actual ISO C feature that
is not supported by K&R is bound to make the compiler more brittle.
Something we do not want, do we ?