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.