Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 6 May 1997 12:56:18 +0900 (JST)
From:      Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To:        Gary Clark II <gclarkii@main.gbdata.com>
Cc:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, jkh@time.cdrom.com, nadav@barcode.co.il, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: /usr/include/ftpio.h is not C++ safe
Message-ID:  <Pine.SV4.3.95.970506125024.8369A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <199705060304.WAA01503@main.gbdata.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 5 May 1997, Gary Clark II wrote:

> What is our reason for having old code around?  Is there a GOOD reason
> why we are trying to support a non-ansi compiler?  What is the chance that
> FreeBSD will ever need to do this in real life?

ANSIfying can be a lot of work and has some pitfalls.  Old code stays K&R
and new code is done in ANSI is a good priority guideline to use.  It's
not a rule that's chiselled in stone however.

Mike





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.95.970506125024.8369A-100000>