From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,df854b5838c3e14
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,df854b5838c3e14
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 10db24,fec75f150a0d78f5
X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: ANSI C and POSIX (was Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada)
Date: 1996/04/12
Message-ID: <dewar.829345962@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 147245415
references: <JSA.96Feb16135027@organon.com> <dewar.828757752@schonberg>
 <828825929snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <dewar.828846122@schonberg>
 <4kkdv4$ik4@nntp.Stanford.EDU>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.edu
Date: 1996-04-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Chuck said

"The list of interesting UNIX-like porting targets that don't
support both Standard C and POSIX.1 gets shorter every year.
I don't feel guilty at all calling code portable even though
I know it would not compile on a Version 7 UNIX system.
"

Of course GCC has a much more agressive view of portability, but it
certainly would be nice to see more standardization here, and for 
example, it sure would be nice if everyone's make utility implemented
at least vaguely the same semantics!