>Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 09:54:24 -0500 (CDT)
>From: Peter Seebach <seebs@solon.com>
>
>No complaints from me on eliminating the "support" for pre-ANSI
>compilers.  We don't support them, we haven't supported them in
>quite a while, and the chances are very bad that any pre-ANSI compiler
>could really make more than a tiny fragment of this code work.
>(If nothing else, can *ANYONE* name a pre-ANSI compiler with
>long long?)

gcc -traditional?

Also, there is nothing to keep <machine/types.h> from using another
compiler's 64-bit integer type for int64_t and u_int64_t.

>Eliminating the old pre-ANSI hacks would be a monumental effort, but
>not using them any more, and accepting patches that remove them when 
>convenient, would be a good way to improve the source tree, IMHO.

This is a religious issue; do we really need to go into it again?
-- 
Mike Long <mikel@shore.net>                http://www.shore.net/~mikel
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands,
hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken