Message-Id: <200006051554.SAA22739@alpha.netvision.net.il>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 18:53:24 +0200
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.1.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <393BB137.9EA960C4@softhome.net> (message from Laurynas Biveinis
	on Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:55:03 +0300)
Subject: Re: ANSI C and stdio.h
References: <3937DEA9 DOT 63606B27 AT softhome DOT net> <200006021918 DOT PAA03693 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <3938C1DE DOT E005BBA9 AT softhome DOT net> <200006030953 DOT MAA01306 AT alpha DOT netvision DOT net DOT il> <39394EC9 DOT 91B87484 AT softhome DOT net> <393AA7CF DOT 51E1DE11 AT softhome DOT net> <200006042012 DOT QAA08975 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <393B7081 DOT DBD8EC8B AT softhome DOT net> <200006051256 DOT IAA25791 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <393BB137 DOT 9EA960C4 AT softhome DOT net>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:55:03 +0300
> From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
> 
> > gratuitously break existing code if we don't have to.
> 
> And what would mean that 'we have to'?

If it breaks something more important, or if the GCC maintainers
invent some new feature that breaks the compiler unless we change the
headers.

In other words, IMHO breaking back compatibility is only justified
when there's absolutely no other choice.