Re: encapsulating directory operations

On 23/05/2025 22:10, Kaz Kylheku wrote:

On 2025-05-23, Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

On 23/05/2025 21:27, Kaz Kylheku wrote:

On 2025-05-23, Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:

>
<snip>
>

(Identifiers starting with E followed by either a digit or an uppercase
letter are reserved; they could be defined as macros in <errno.h>.)

>
But C99 introduced, for instance "double round(double);"

>
I am tempted to ask 'who cares?' but I will sit on my hands and
be good.

 That's essentially what I'm saying.

But we refuse to care for different reasons, it seems.

Who cares about the silly reserved
name spaces that provide nothing you can rely on to thwart future name
clashes.

And who cares about future instability if C90 remains just as stable as ever it was? (If care there is, it's caring that implementors continue to include C90 implementations in their repertoire.)
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within