Re: Optional args in C code.

Joe Knapka wrote:

> Yes there is ("-ansi"), and when I use it, *nothing* in the source
> tree will build -- because // is not ANSI C, apparently. At least,
> GCC thinks not.
>
> Shall we convert everything to /* comments */ then? Or perhaps
> we really want the code to conform to ISO C '99, rather
> than ANSI? (C99 apparently allows variable declarations anywhere,
> though.) Or is GCC wrong about // comments?

We should pick a standard and go with it.  I had no idea there was a C
standard that allowed declarations everywhere.  I'd love to use declarations
everwhere.  I hate that in C.

My default VC setup allows // but not embedded declarations.  What standard
is that?  I need to find out if I can get away with embedded declarations in
my Visual C dev system.  I'm using Visual Net 2003, so it should support the
latest ansii standards.

Ben never used // and I thought he was just old fashioned.  I know he uses
GCC.  So we should be able to agree on a modern standard.

Ben:  What's your take on all this?

P.S.  I'm modifying builtins-strnig.c right now adding macros and getting it
to run on windows.  So let me own it for a while.