Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:18640] use of antique C idioms in Ruby source/extensions?"
    on 01/07/28, Ned Konz <ned / bike-nomad.com> writes:

|Anyway, what I'm curious about is why, even if you're using a C compiler 
|that uses prototypes, you aren't using them in the definition of functions. 

Because I prefer that.  Yes, I'm an old-timer.  But when I rewrite the
core, I think I'm *forced* to choose new style.

|Also, why is "class" spelled like "klass"? Seems like the C compilers that 
|you're targeting to (some of them pre-ANSI) wouldn't have any problem with 
|the word "class". The source is obviously not legal C++, so you wouldn't 
|have been feeding it to a C++ compiler...

ruby.h may be included from C++ source, so that it's wise to avoid C++
keyword there.  There's no special reason for other occasion of
"klass" in the C source code (consistency? perhaps).

							matz.