Re: diffutils 2.8.1 ISO C90 compliance patch

[Paul Eggert]

"Paul Edwards" <address@hidden> writes:

>> So, whatever solution
>> works for this, just use the same solution for #include <sys/types.h>.
>
> Well I can translate it into DD:INCLUDE(TYPES) and have a
> member of the PDS called "TYPES".

Excellent.  Let's do that, then.

> Why don't you tell all the people who don't have string.h

We don't worry much about those people these days.  Systems
that lack string.h are obsolete.

> Why go to all the trouble of #defining out a standard include file
> that every C90 environment must have, but not do it for a completely
> non-standard sys/types.h?

Because in the old days many systems lacked string.h.  New code
doesn't worry about these old systems.  But there is no pressing
reason to convert old code to the new style, since the old code works.

> Why not write the code properly to not use non-standard includes?

But the code is written properly.  Among other things, <sys/types.h>
is standard.  It is specified by ISO/IEC 9945.  This international
standard is much more widely available than the C89 standard is.  You
can see a copy of its current specification for <sys/types.h> at
<http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/sys/types.h.html>.
There is no similar resource for C89.