Re: support for pre-C99 compilers

[Sam S. <sd...@gn...>]

> * Bruno Haible <oe...@py...t> [2017-10-20 01:28:20 +0200]:
>
> Sam wrote:
>> > removing 'varbrace' does not have a significant benefit.
>>
>> The huge benefit is that C files will look like normal C.
>
> This would not be a benefit. It would be a drawback.

People are put off by the weird *.d extension (which falsely hints in
the direction of the D language).
People are put off by the gratuitous syntax modifications.
People keep telling you that and you are ignoring them.

> During development, it is important to see all local variable
> declarations, in an easy way.

Yep - just like all the other syntax highlighting.

> With plain C syntax, neither Emacs nor kate can do this.

I have never used kate/pico/nano/axe/...
Emacs & VIM handle C syntax highlighting just fine
(and MultiEdit did 25 years ago).
Even the extra CLISP types are handled with the clisp/emacs/d-mode.el
and clisp/emacs/d.vim extensions (and, before you ask, if we move to
*.c from *.d, it would be _easier_ to handle them).

> Most probably, because the C syntax is a bit ambiguous.

C syntax is trash, but Emacs & VIM handle it just fine.

> Whereas with 'var' syntax, editors can do this (see attached screenshot).

I removed those "var" markers in Emacs and created a screenshot.
Enjoy.