HS> Most compilers accept non-standard code. And most
 HS> people understand non-standard code aswell.
DM>Are you sure about either, or is it just YOUR compiler(s)?  I seem to
DM>recall you going on about some non-standard code (cprintf?) that happens
DM>to work on YOUR compilers, but not really _ALL_ current compilers.
How many other compilers need cprintf? There's no use whining if someone is 
too stupid to realize that cprintf() is only useful within DOS. Hence, all 
DOS compilers have it (the ones that I know of anyway, and that list is big). 
If a DOS compilers doesn't have it, then it would most likely contain an 
equivalent. Another error in your previous asseration is your assumption that 
cprintf() is in the standard. It is not.
 HS> why bother to do something like
 HS> SomeType *mytime = (SomeType *)malloc(sizeof(SomeType))
 HS> when,
 HS> SomeType *mytype = malloc(.... etc
 HS> compiles. Even though ANSI-C++ forbids void *
DM>We're not talking about C++, are we?  I thought this was the C echo.
Same concept applies to C. You did realize that, didn't you?
 HS> conversion it still works, doesn't it? I could go on
 HS> and on about it but I assume you get the idea.
DM>Yes, I get the idea that you have no clue about what standards mean.
Just as I suspected. Your brain failed to synapse such infantile logic.
... Drive not ready: Abort, Retry, Fail, Wait?
--- Ezycom V1.48g0 01fd016b
---------------