Using identifiers with more than 7 chars. #$%@
Tom Keller
mc68020 at gilbbs.UUCP
Wed Mar 5 12:12:40 AEST 1986
In article <526 at dsi1.UUCP>, ron at dsi1.UUCP (Ron Flax) writes:
> Sorry for posting here but where else does one post to readers of this
> newsgroup?
>
> [FLAME ON!]
>
> I wish that the people that post sources to the net would try to keep
> in mind that some of us have compilers that can't swollow indentifiers
> that are longer than seven (7) characters long. Now I know that all of
> you guys and gals in BSDLand like to make you programs look real pretty
> with all those nice long descriptive names for your functions and
> macros but some of your less fortunate counterparts don't have this
> luxury and it's a real pain to go through an entire program full of
>
> system_call_seven (what_ever_cmd_five);
> . . .
> system_call_eight (what_ever_cmd_four);
>
> you get my drift? I realize that some programs are not going to port
> to some machines, but when someone claims to the net that a program
> will be "easy to port" or that "it should run on..." they could at
> least make an attempt to verify this fact. Maybe they should be
> sentenced to work on a machine that chokes on the slightest
> inconsistancy for a while.
>
> [FLAME OFF now.]
Indeed. As an additional aside (my appologies to you UNIX-purists in
advance) but believe it or not, *SOME* of us are running Ultrix, or XENIX,
or some other form of UNIX! If you are going to post software with major
system dependencies (such as long identifier names) LABEL them in the
summary, damn it!
--
====================================
Disclaimer: I hereby disclaim and and all responsibility for disclaimers.
tom keller
{ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020
(* we may not be big, but we're small! *)
More information about the Comp.sources.bugs
mailing list