portability

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <908 at ubu.warwick.UUCP> geoff at emerald.UUCP (Geoff Rimmer) writes:
>Awww come on!  The main extensions they have provided are not
>essential to programming in C - a lot of the extensions are things
>like new keywords like
>	pascal, fortran, cdecl, far, near, huge.

Some of us would argue that the ABSENCE of these extensions is more
useful to the portable-C programmer than their presence!  I have had
code in the past that used several of these as variable names, etc.
Unless the compiler manages to allow them as user identifiers outside
the context of type declarations, they are bound to get in the way.
(I don't know whether or not MicroSoft's compiler is that clever.)

>BTW, can anyone tell me if the keyword 'volatile' is part of the ANSI
>standard?  (I mean is it true to say that all ANSI C compilers must
>have the keyword volatile WORKING (i.e. semantically as well as
>syntactically)?)

Certainly.  What would be the point if it didn't have to work?