Someone left nameless quoted:

> As the GCC info file states: the
> -pedantic option is only there to satisfy pedants (and we wouldn't like to
> be called *that*, would we? :-)

"No, we'd rather be called incompetant parochial feebs who want to lock 
people into our proprietary ill-conceived language extensions in order to
enhance the authority of the Free Software Foundation."

There was a right way to define the extended long type.  GNU's pomposity
is no excuse for their incompetance.