From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RFC: status icon support Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:03 -0500 Message-ID: References: <200801120157.m0C1v6WL020654@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <200801121352.m0CDqERq011212@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <85zlvb3yhn.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1200276116 19906 80.91.229.12 (14 Jan 2008 02:01:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 02:01:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tromey@redhat.com, schwab@suse.de, dann@ics.uci.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 14 03:02:18 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 1JEEeY-00064q-1P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 03:02:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEEe9-0004je-SH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JEEdO-0003oF-JH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:06 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JEEdM-0003mH-Tj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEEdM-0003m1-KB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:04 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JEEdM-0003Nv-89 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:04 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JEEdL-0005jG-NW; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:01:03 -0500 In-reply-to: <85zlvb3yhn.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:33:08 +0100) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:86865 Archived-At: 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. Not allowed? Nobody can stop us! The point is that Emacs does NOT have a convention against K&R function definitions. When Dan told Tom Tromey to rewrite to ANSI style, he implied that that was our convention. That is not so. I do not want to have a discussion about changing this, because there are other, more important things to spend our time on. For instance, a few bugs remain in Emacs 22.