Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site shark.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!shark!hutch
From: hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Improving C
Message-ID: <610@shark.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 11-Mar-84 15:24:12 EST
Article-I.D.: shark.610
Posted: Sun Mar 11 15:24:12 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Mar-84 20:11:08 EST
References: <22000002@ucbcad.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 13



What is really wrong with an options switch allowing bounds checking
to be included, if the default is to leave it out?

I don't recall it being forbidden in the Book.

Personally I think that it's just fear of the loss of job security
on the part of those objecting.  After all, if bounds checking in
the development phase were to speed your time-to-running-program,
you'd have to do more work.  (Oh, before I offend anyone, :-}  )

Hutch  (in favor of allowing options rather than forbidding them)