From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <775b8d190604080028w757cafbbof4ab942dce31aaa@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat,  8 Apr 2006 17:28:28 +1000
From: "Bruce Ellis" <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Good enough approximation for ape/pcc
In-Reply-To: <f61eb581a846e947380a3c86c89c383c@swtch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1d5d51400604072118t285ca315w5531a5a251676948@mail.gmail.com>
	<f61eb581a846e947380a3c86c89c383c@swtch.com>
Cc:
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 330c8e94-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

when ansi was going crazy, many years ago, i gave a talk
at AUUGM about "safe C".  most of the audience understood,
despite my tequilla girl and my silly hat.

write it clean and portable ... ifdefs are so 80s.

brucee

On 4/8/06, Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com> wrote:
> > New codes should be written in p9p or plan9 native, But for other poepl=
es
> > project they should be the one to decide I guess.As I understand it
> > this was the main reason ape was created
> >
> > How do you guys handle this type of situation?
>
> They don't.  They just like to talk.
>
> APE is still used for porting large software packages to Plan 9,
> like TeX, Python, and Ghostscript, just to name a few.  But the
> only real way to find out whether something will compile with
> APE is to try it.
>
> Russ
>
>