From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 22:37:59 -0400
From: a@9srv.net
Message-ID: <299894e4d6e9869eeb1b646ac9dd22bb@9srv.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130329190345.GA2335@polynum.com>
References: <17666A31-B506-46C1-972F-2D6407C4B8DD@corpus-callosum.com>
	<CAOw7k5jkDwG4fant7hJNPk_1ivDLJhAaZiH72xAid=6mq9Tgxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<C0693EB5-7CF0-4333-95F0-F82DFAD56845@corpus-callosum.com>
	<20130329174148.GA98286@intma.in>
	<CAOw7k5jQu_7RBmCcTfLxY8YgVN7DGRgtKX1WRVeYjygVobvGZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<24472F85-7A42-4CDD-8CF2-5A1CEB25E109@corpus-callosum.com>
	<20130329190345.GA2335@polynum.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] APE inconsistencies
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3abf8892-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> It should be indeed underlined that this is a compatibility
> feature, and not a POSIX feature.

APE does an excellent job of making that distinction clear.
Its use of defines to forcibly break syntax was quite
educational as a young programmer.

Anthony