MB>
  > JdeBP> Many of them are legacies of the hordes of Pascal
  > JdeBP> programmers that infested Microsoft in the middle 1980s.
  > JdeBP> They didn't really know how to write C, so they did daft
  > JdeBP> things like
  >
  > JdeBP>     typedef long LONG ;
  >
  > On general principles, it made sense to add a layer of indirection to
  > type specifications.  This is especially important with language
  > extensions such as "FAR" or "NEAR", but it was probably
  > reasonable to make all types indirect for the sake of
  > consistency.  [...]
MB>

  On general principles, it is better to stick with the keywords that are
  actually defined for the language, that are in all the reference books,
  and that *any* C programmer will recognise at a glance.

  There is a valid argument for

    #define FAR __far

  and its ilk, because no-one seems to agree what keyword will be used
  this year for pointer distance modifiers.  Such things are not standard,
  and the use of uppercase flags them as "macro" in the minds of most C
  programmers.

  However, the argument to extend this from *non*-standard keywords to
  *standard* keywords merely for the sake of "consistency of
  capitalisation" is clearly a nonsense, especially given that the C
  paradigm for many years has been to only use all-uppercase for macros
  and manifest constants.

  > JdeBP <
___
 X MegaMail 2.10 #0:

--- Maximus/2 3.01