Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ucsd!orion!ics.uci.edu!nagel
From: nagel@ics.uci.edu (Mark Nagel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Lightspeed C projects
Message-ID: <736@orion.cf.uci.edu>
Date: 28 Jun 88 04:58:21 GMT
References: <1407@its63b.ed.ac.uk> <4710@husc6.harvard.edu> <6879@cup.portal.com> <12917@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: news@orion.cf.uci.edu
Reply-To: nagel@ics.uci.edu (Mark Nagel)
Organization: University of California, Irvine - Dept. of ICS
Lines: 15

In article <12917@apple.Apple.COM> dwb@apple.apple.com.UUCP (David W. Berry) writes:
+In article <6879@cup.portal.com> Michael_mkahl_Kahl@cup.portal.com writes:
+>In addition, LSC 3.0 pre-#defines the symbol "THINK_C".
+	Any particular reason for using THINK_C instead of the
+more ANSI-acceptable __THINK_C?

Speaking of ANSI-acceptability, can anyone from THINK expand on the changes
(if any) made to LightspeedC in order to bring it more into ANSI compliance?
E.g. have prototypes been modified to reflect the new standard?  Have the new
keywords (const, volatile, etc.) been added?  Anything??

--
Mark D. Nagel
Department of Information and Computer Science, UC Irvine
nagel@ics.uci.edu             (ARPA)                I'm not a graduate student,
{sdcsvax|ucbvax}!ucivax!nagel (UUCP)                but I play one on TV...