Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.unit0.net!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 00:25:39 -0500
From: Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Default values in #define
References: <d6e97054-1a68-418a-a6ae-5807ffccabbe@googlegroups.com> <e1pce8F2cguU1@mid.individual.net> <87twegmnvj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <a2a939d8-085a-45e8-b311-40680d6a63a2@googlegroups.com> <npf4im$1kc$1@dont-email.me> <d6644a25-bcc6-47f8-8a6d-d7ef065b6fed@googlegroups.com> <abf24990-6d42-49bc-8fa2-8c4fe3b5ff07@googlegroups.com> <87vaystxvp.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <a60b8751-0ae6-4796-abee-5a88ff0630fd@googlegroups.com> <lnoa4kfmkv.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <1d377167-a33a-402e-89ee-d3efa06d95ab@googlegroups.com> <87twebuwwn.fsf@gmail.com> <36a5bcc3-9e30-468c-a3e1-4b9c9788d395@googlegroups.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 06:25:37 +0100
Message-ID: <87eg5ed9gu.fsf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bYdlFF74Wm3l647apfEaKgB054k=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Lines: 22
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-to1QxaOz/P3jrruSnCl19eCjNNqAErBVavBIx1LD0J/6MXe0dgrOtMx4/RDTKuBLMlDHd2iY+/+A3aJ!pSZFqA5LrhA0s3w/6F5/6n3Jwnx8hgVArFybA2xZq+DzSPUYF9Umq8es2VcMm2AgMR/J
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2404
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:92667

supercat@casperkitty.com writes:

> On Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 2:07:36 PM UTC-5, gwowen wrote:
>> supercat writes:
>> > Compiler writers don't sit down and say "Hey, let's write a useless
>> > compiler".  They do, however, fail to recognize what has traditionally
>> > made C useful for many applications.
>> 
>> Of the uncountable stupid things you've said, this may be the stupidest.
>
> There are many applications (including 99.99999% of embedded programs)
> for which C's usefulness is a result of widespread support for features
> beyond what the Standard mandates.  Do you disagree with that?

No.

> At least some compiler writers have taken the attitude that code which
> relies upon such features has no real meaning, and works only by
> "happenstance", no matter how many earlier compilers have interpreted it
> consistently.  Do you disagree with that?

Yes.  Completely.