RE: Agree: Require ANSI C for development [Was: libwww ]
Subject: RE: Agree: Require ANSI C for development [Was: libwww ]
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 10:49:51 +0200
>OK, I'll accept your idea. After all, I can't expect that others will
>make *all* the compromises. In general, returning status code values is
>a Good Idea which is kind of hard to argue with, and your suggested W3_MALLOC
>macro which has the type built in looks quite livable.
>But it's not "simple" :-)
There is generally a choice with simplicity. Over simplify one area and you
compilicate others. Having a common standard for the API error codes is in
my view simpler because then you never have to think about how the errors
It means that you cant write code that is quite as compact. But this tends to
work out an advantage. The coder can't bury a proceedure that can possibly fail
in the middle of a function and end up with something that can't handle errors.
`Compact' code is one of those things that everyone thinks is great when they do
it themselves but less great when they are coping with other peoples
obfusticated C. Its an irregular verb:-
I compact code
You oddly code
He obfusticates code
There are a number of C constructs I would really like to kill kill kill....
Mumble.. Anyone ever tried Occam2 ?