Re: Discussion about why GNU/Linux system upgrades cause old programs to break

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > >   > > > It wasn't broken back when Emacs 24.1 was released, or at least we
  > >   > > > weren't aware of that.  It's only the latest GCC releases quite
  > >   > > > arbitrarily decided that -std=gnu99 means to reject any program that
  > >   > > > does not strictly conforms to C99.  Previously, -std=gnu99, unlike
  > >   > > > -std=c99, always allowed useful deviations from the standard.
  > >   > > 
  > >   > > The latter sentence is interesting.  It implies that -std=gnu99 no
  > >   > > longer permits a useful deviation from the standard, but that's simply
  > >   > > not the case.
  > >   > > 
  > >   > > It no longer permits a certain deviation that was, through experience,
  > >   > > seen to be far more harmful than useful.
  > > 
  > >   > IOW, you've redefined "useful" to suit the point you want to make.
  > >   > How does this add any useful insights to this discussion?

Now that I know what the context was for that back-and-forth, I have
to agree with the words I think are Eli's: with 5 >s or 3 >s.

Even if we agree that that particular deviation had become a bad idea
to use, reporting it as an error and making compilation fail is harsh,
and causes trouble for the users of GCC.  I think there are kinder
ways to guide the users to change that code.


-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)