Re: Adding <alloca.h> ?

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

    Date:        Thu, 13 May 2021 16:00:56 -0700
    From:        John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>
    Message-ID:  <202105132300.14DN0uwZ026861%server.cornerstoneservice.ca@localhost>

  | On May 13, 22:37, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
  | } The source is wrong to request strict C++14
  | } compatibility and then use an extension.

I do not agree with that.  Whether or not it
is the right thing to do in a particular case
can be debated (I have always believed alloca
to be an evil hack, and never justifiable, but...)
but the general idea of "standard but for
this one thing" (or small enumerated set of
things) is a perfectly reasonable approach.
Much better than "the standard is not
good enough for me, so anything goes".

  | This comment reminds me of Henry Spencer's "All the World's
  | a VAX" comment:

It shouldn't, different issue entirely.

  | However, the reality is that Linux sets the standard,

No POSIX does that.  Most serious developers
will try to live with what POSIX provides
when it is pointed out to them, but there
are cases when that is not possible.

Then we need to decide if the linux (or
android which is often similar) or macos,
or ... way is acceptable, avoiding NIH as
much as possible, while not accepting
garbage just because they (whoever they are)
did it first.

kre