IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Nah, not Kernighan and Ritchie.
K&R:
Blanks, tabs, newlines, and comments (collectively called "white space") as described below are ignored except as they serve to separate tokens. Some white space is required to separate otherwise adjacent identifiers, keywords, and constants.
So any C compiler that does otherwise would not be K&R.
Alex

"I have a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition which this margin is too narrow to contain. -- Pierre de Fermat (1601-1665)
New Right, Not K&R
I didn't start using C until 1984 or so, and every compiler I saw was mostly K&R compliant. ISO came later. I was told that a lot of the code I was looking at was written like it was because of the 80 line limitation on the system it came from. I never saw the original system, and the story came to me as probably third hand word-of-mouth.
I suppose you can say that if it's not K&R, it's not a C compiler.
I suppose that the story could also be bullshit, although I did not pass it on with such knowledge. A lot of the information I possess, I have through informal sources, including this forum.
I recalled the story and thought that it pertained to the thread. Sorry about that..

Hugh
New Don't be. Sorry, I mean.
New Re: Right, Not K&R
No, it's very interesting! Even as late as the late 70s, college computing was done on a Forbin Project style 'frame - ours was a Cyber, one of the fastest computers then made. The hapless student/researcher would code up his program on Hollerith cards and present the deck at the I/O window - later a public card reader was available and you could submit your own deck, eat some horrid dry cookies or chips with your 10th Dr. Pepper of the day, and wait for the I/O window troll to deliver your output.

General availability of time-share terminals only came in early 80s IIRC.

PROFS for VM/CMS (Professional Office System or some such), the GroupWise of its day, had "virtual card readers" and "virtual punch files". GASP!
-drl
New Actually, might it have been a "standard" to fit terminals?
When I first went to work (in the mid-80's) programming C, it was a "standard" that the code would match a certain format - and, except for long strings (back in those days C compilers didn't append adjacent strings together), it was recommended that we use 80-character lines (at worst) and preferably something like 72 columns, for readability on the Wyse75 terminals we had at the time and, I suppose, the ability to more easily print stuff out on the 80-column line printers we had at the time.

If I remember correctly, you could put those Wyse's into 132-column mode, but you'd probably go blind if you did so. And if you went over 80 columns on any particular terminal, you'd have to monkey with termcap/terminal settings, and it seems to me it always seemed to take a lot more effort than it was ever worth.
The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
     Comments Invited on Adobe Javascript - (deSitter) - (40)
         Why can't they pick a better language? - (ben_tilly) - (37)
             I agree. - (static) - (4)
                 Re: I agree. - (deSitter) - (3)
                     Same language... - (ChrisR) - (1)
                         Re: Same language... - (deSitter)
                     I didn't look. - (static)
             You Perl people must like... - (ChrisR) - (31)
                 not new vernacular but sigil doesnt mean sigil anymore? - (boxley)
                 I didn't invent it - (ben_tilly) - (29)
                     Re: I didn't invent it - (deSitter) - (28)
                         It isn't, necessarily - (ben_tilly) - (4)
                             Re: It isn't, necessarily - (deSitter) - (3)
                                 Why is that wrong? - (ben_tilly)
                                 Not me - (tuberculosis) - (1)
                                     You've got life easy - (tonytib)
                         Not idiomatically. - (static) - (22)
                             In Perl they are dereferencing operators -NT - (ben_tilly)
                             semicolon rant IV - (tablizer) - (20)
                                 Or you can use periods. - (tuberculosis) - (19)
                                     re: periods - (tablizer) - (18)
                                         re: periods - (deSitter) - (17)
                                             Huh? -NT - (tablizer) - (16)
                                                 Re: Huh? - (deSitter) - (15)
                                                     Who is "everyone"? - (tablizer) - (5)
                                                         Once More With Feeling - (deSitter) - (4)
                                                             I don't care about the 1970's, I hate them here and now - (tablizer) - (3)
                                                                 Simple solution. - (static)
                                                                 The Galileo of Computing! - (deSitter) - (1)
                                                                     Others complain too - (tablizer)
                                                     Wrong. - (admin) - (2)
                                                         Re: Wrong. - (deSitter) - (1)
                                                             This is a general trend - (ben_tilly)
                                                     Historical trivia that applies... - (hnick) - (5)
                                                         Nah, not Kernighan and Ritchie. - (a6l6e6x) - (4)
                                                             Right, Not K&R - (hnick) - (3)
                                                                 Don't be. Sorry, I mean. -NT - (CRConrad)
                                                                 Re: Right, Not K&R - (deSitter)
                                                                 Actually, might it have been a "standard" to fit terminals? - (wharris2)
         Initial Comments - (ChrisR) - (1)
             Re: Initial Comments - (deSitter)

OK, my response to that is pending a Google search.
53 ms