From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marc Espie <espie@quatramaran.ens.fr>
To: mark@codesourcery.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC's statement expression extension
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:59:00 -0000
Message-id: <200007281059.MAA05690@quatramaran.ens.fr>
References: <10007280154.AA18114@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <20000727191552S.mitchell@codesourcery.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-07/msg00924.html

In article < 20000727191552S.mitchell@codesourcery.com > you write:

>One of the saving graces here is that older versions of the compiler
>are always available.  It's not unreasonable to (occasionally) have
>users make a choice between more features/better optimization and
>100% source compatibility.  Of course, we shouldn't do this unless
>there's a good reason.

Err... ouch.
Remember, that's the way the linux kernel stayed stuck with 2.7.2 for years,
more or less.
These days, there are vendors who provide complete OS with an integrated
compiler.  Changing the compiler with a more recent one usually breaks 
things, not that many, but a few.  Most users are not savvy enough to do
the update.  Many users don't even know the issues involved.
Also, some people have to deal with clueless system administrators, or people
who don't care at all about C++. Those guys will stick with an older C 
compiler, because it compiles C the way K&R said it should be.
(and yes, in a world of 40Gb disks, you still meet quota and policies of
"don't install stuff on MY machine").

`User takes sysadmin hostage. Threatens to install gcc 3.0. News at eleven.'

Narrows down the `good reasons' quite a lot in my opinion...