From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dewar@gnat.com
To: dewar@gnat.com, jbuck@synopsys.COM
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, moshier@moshier.ne.mediaone.net, mrs@windriver.com
Subject: Re: What is acceptable for -ffast-math? (Was: associative law in combine)
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:38:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010731013824.3C543F2B53@nile.gnat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg02039.html

<<The standard specifies that some names, including names beginning with
two underscores, are reserved to the implementation.  Extensions that
use reserved names don't conflict with the standard.  But extensions that
introduce new keywords, where the keywords aren't in the implementation
namespace, do conflict with the standard because a programmer can legally
use that word as an identifier.
>>

OK, yes of course new reserved words are not allowed (COBOL is the only
standard language in which new keywords are allowed, well at least this
was in 74 COBOL, not sure if this was retained in later standards).

But it is interesting that many of the GNU extensions do not conflict with
the standard (e.g. nested procedures, dynamic arrays), so these are not
examples of GNU-C not meeting the criterion of being standard by default.