Subject: Re: C Language Standard(s)
To: Jason Thorpe <>
From: Perry E. Metzger <>
List: current-users
Date: 01/11/1996 10:13:39
Jason Thorpe writes:
> Put quite simply, code that utilized K&R-style function decls is just 
> "more portable".  I quite often rip code out of NetBSD and compile it 
> under SunOS (with the native compiler).

This I can easily understand...

> And there just might be a time 
> in the future when someone with a K&R compiler needs to bootstrap NetBSD 
> on some new could happen...

...but on the other hand, unproto will work just fine in this case.

> Of course, I don't really want to "mandate" anything.  I'd much rather 
> *encourage* writing clean, portable code.

I think that the argument is that there is a slight conflict here
between maximal portability and maximal cleanliness. New-style
function definitions and the rest would make things cleaner and less
buggy, but reduce portability. I guess its a question of priorities.