From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dave@horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 08:22:17 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] why the leading under score added to function names? In-Reply-To: <201202221917.q1MJHSGw013561@freefriends.org> References: <201202221917.q1MJHSGw013561@freefriends.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Feb 2012, arnold at skeeve.com wrote: > This is interesting. It shows that (apparently) early on, assembler was > viewed as the primary programming language. Well, C didn't exactly spring from Zeus's brow :-) A good chunk of the C library was in assembler, as were quite a number of programs. > It also shows the consequences a small, apparently local decision can have: > here we are 40+ years later and GCC on Windows is still preprending > underscores to function names! When it comes to Windoze, nothing surprises me any more. Unix has evolved over the years, but Windoze was spat out and hatched. -- Dave