From:	"Traveler" <traveler AT netti DOT fi>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: About standards
Date:	Tue, 26 Dec 2000 17:21:09 +0200
Organization:	SAUNALAHDEN asiakas
Lines:	25
Message-ID:	<92ac2n$35$1@tron.sci.fi>
References:	<003c01c06f2c$e32571a0$0500a8c0 AT brk>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	mdccclxxxvii.hdyn.saunalahti.fi
X-Trace:	tron.sci.fi 977843095 101 195.197.42.87 (26 Dec 2000 15:04:55 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	newsmaster AT saunalahti DOT fi
NNTP-Posting-Date:	26 Dec 2000 15:04:55 GMT
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Newsreader:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> Me too. I think I even saw a page telling what's new in it... But who
cares
> about
> standards when not even GCC supports the whole new one...?

Generally standards are good, except in the case of Microsoft :) If they
would have abonded the backward compatibility with their 16-bit DOS then we
would have had 32-bit operating system the first time (was it in -87 or -88
?) the 386 processor was released by Intel.
(Yeah, I know Unix gurus have had 32-bit OS for over two decade...)

But when it takes too long for one group to release one then there is no
other solution than to make as "general" code as possible and hope for the
best.

> Oh, and C is and will be a better standard so use C instead ;)
>

I agree.

"Traveler 2000AD"
traveler AT netti DOT fi

- Raw text -