RE: [Dev-C++] The new C99 Standard

[Ioannis V. <no...@ya...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev...@li...
> [mailto:dev...@li...]On Behalf Of Chad
> Simmons
> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 6:25 PM
> To: dev...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Dev-C++] The new C99 Standard
> I guess my point it that adding new data types doesn't in any way change
> existing functionality, so I don't see where your claim that the C99
> standards breaks compatibility has much of a leg to stand on.
>
> Chad Simmons

:) This is my last message concerning the matter since i am starting to feel
the anger of the others. long was the largest integer supported by the C89.
The standard did not define a size, only the fact that
sizeof(int)<=sizeof(long).

When writing portable code on any platform, the assumption that long is the
largest integer value supported was made. Now this has changed and the most
code must be changed.

Also the need for "100" more integer types did not exist. The introduction
of system specific integers breaks the generality of the language. It is
system vendor's job to provide platform extensions. When i write C code i
expect it to run unchanged from Pentium IV to PDP-11 in the local museum.

Except of these incompatibilites, adddition of more features doing the same
job as existing ones (in the style write, writeln, e.t.c. of Pascal)
increases the weight of the language without adding any new benefit.

E.g.. int a[]={[2]=1, [1]=0, [0]=7};

which is equivallent of always existing int a[]={7,0,1};


Ioannis