From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RFC: status icon support Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:33:08 +0100 Message-ID: <85zlvb3yhn.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <200801120157.m0C1v6WL020654@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <200801121352.m0CDqERq011212@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1200148359 11793 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2008 14:32:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 14:32:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tromey@redhat.com, Dan Nicolaescu , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 12 15:33:00 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JDhPu-0000iX-6O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:32:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDhPV-0002hv-5O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:32:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JDhPL-0002hH-FA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:32:23 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JDhPK-0002gs-26 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:32:23 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDhPJ-0002gp-Rh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:32:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-01.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.41]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JDhPG-0006wP-19; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:32:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-13-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-13-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.30]) by mail-in-01.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656EF1D3161; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:32:16 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail-in-05.arcor-online.net (mail-in-05.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.45]) by mail-in-13-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54D8B1B8E3B; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:32:16 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-008-152.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.8.152]) by mail-in-05.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10CF41C36AE; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:31:59 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 2D7101C3E010; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:33:07 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Andreas Schwab's message of "Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:13:47 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/5478/Fri Jan 11 16:39:22 2008 on mail-in-05.arcor-online.net X-Virus-Status: Clean X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:86799 Archived-At: Andreas Schwab writes: > Dan Nicolaescu writes: > >> Richard Stallman writes: >> >> > Please no K&R in new code. >> > >> > We have no policy against K&R style. I recently accepted non-K&R >> > function definitions in Emacs sources, but I still do not particularly >> > like it. K&R style is easier to read anyway. >> >> It might be easier to read for you personally, but it is harder for >> people that have never written/read any K&R code. Some emacs >> contributors have started programming after C was standardized, so they >> never had a chance to know any different (and its quite possible that >> some were even born after the standardization). > > Old-style function definitions are still part of the C standard. They > are only marked obsolescent. "only"? Obsolescing K&R Function Declaration Style The K&R function declaration style in the form of func(n, m) /* return type is unspecified */ int n; double m; /* function parameters */ { /*function body*/ } was used in K&R. It was later replaced by the more common form: int func(int n, double m) { /*function body*/ } The K&R function declaration style is obsolescent in C99. This means that compilers are allowed to reject such code or accept it with a warning message. In either case, they aren't allowed to ignore it. Compilers are not allowed to accept this style of declaration without warning. They are free to reject it completely, however. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum