Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: A Note on Readability Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 11:55:04 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 35 Message-ID: <874mn4sarb.fsf@kst-u.example.com> References: <1d72d1ba-3317-4725-bedd-698843ca9c35@googlegroups.com> <0f9297b6-2d4c-4d12-8e97-470027248f72@googlegroups.com> <85343d47-257a-4403-9672-40991134ba13@googlegroups.com> <55587201.6548218@news.xs4all.nl> <67b5daac-4378-458c-a6d0-fbf4e20d8340@googlegroups.com> <29103fb2-ce27-4c7f-a189-8ff170f5e246@googlegroups.com> <555A2A66.1040201@verizon.net> <70adeda1-3b83-4a96-b57b-59ac062f0bc6@googlegroups.com> <87oalg2zq0.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <792ce9c8-075c-4b19-8a2f-ac75dab1a178@googlegroups.com> <0c8d256a-990c-4813-9f2f-eeed9955f83a@googlegroups.com> <87d21tu91s.fsf@kst-u.example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9be37d943435275679235b07c7947eef"; logging-data="28697"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19we+owCEIgw85XQru5li5W" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:/qEJJYlysG1eS9wTLBHvxvYCMNE= sha1:hmDjGqZqN0cJbpQ4K4mz8HLKmOQ= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:62463 David Kleinecke writes: > On Thursday, May 21, 2015 at 10:36:54 AM UTC-7, Keith Thompson wrote: >> David Kleinecke writes: >> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 at 10:02:45 AM UTC-7, Les Cargill wrote: >> >> Make Yer Own Darn Language And Leave C Alone. :) >> >> >> >> ( 'C' is going to get incrementally harder to improve as >> >> time passes . ) >> > >> > I prefer K&R C but not the commitment to a Unix environment. >> >> You prefer K&R C to C90? Do you find no value in function prototypes? > > You are correct about function prototypes - that is an improvement on > K&R. So is required function types and I suspect a few more details. > K&R isn't perfect - just better. > > I am willing to accept section 6 of the C90 standard as core C - which > is what I am talking about - unless I uncover a problem (which I have > not so far). > > Assuming the standards have not changed structure - is there anything in > the later standards that has changed or expanded section 6? C99: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf C11: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf Each includes a foreword summarizing the changes from the previous edition. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc. "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this." -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"