Re: acl for cvs, access from internal machines

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Thursday, June 26, 2003 at 18:48:15 (-0700), Edward Peschko wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: acl for cvs, access from internal machines
>
> ok... I used gcc-2.95.3 as a back-check (as well 
> as /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc) do you have a K&R compiler I could
> check it out on?

SunOS-4.1 is still running in several places.  I have a colleague with
such a machine to test Smail's portability using that compiler.  (It
still generates a lot better sparc and m68k code than GCC too!)

You can get the source for many versions and ports of the original PCC
from the unix archives and elsewhere, though I don't know if you'd want
to go to the trouble to collect and build all the headers and libraries
to go along with it.  It would probably be easier and faster to just
boot up UNIX 32/V on a VAX simulator (V7 on a PDP would probably cause
too many headaches trying to get the code to work with 16-bit ints again)

> > Many function calls are missing the space before the parenthesis entirely.
> > Some lines are a lot longer than eighty columns without a real need for
> > them to be.
> 
> That's my fault, my environment has exceedingly small type, and is 
> greater than 80 characters because I do a lot of data work.

Personally I think anyone who complains about code with lines less than
a minimum of at least 132 columns is living so far back in the dark ages
that they and their complaints just don't matter.  Why I haven't been
hampered by 80-column limits since the last time I used punched cards,
and for the purposes of programming that's a very long time ago!  I
graduated directly from punched cards to 132-column paper and
full-screen editors that provide good line-wrap help or which have
horizontal scrolling.  These days my main working windows (i.e. the ones
with characters big enough to match about 10 points or more ) are always
at least 120 characters wide, though of course I can grow them at will
to much wider sizes.  I can't imagine anyone being very productive any
more with tools that still limit them to the equivalent of 80-column
cards.  K&R C might not be quite gone and forgotten, but 80-column cards
certainly should be!

-- 
                                                                Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;            <address@hidden>;           <address@hidden>
Planix, Inc. <address@hidden>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <address@hidden>