>IMHO, I'd say C is C and I think it's better to leave >it as it is. If you want a language with extra features you can >probably find one.
the blocks thing only works (apparently) by having two (visible) classes of function pointers. ugh. `clang' is apparently not just the name of the frontend but the sound it makes (cf. the `cricket bat' speech in Stoppard's `The Real Thing'). automatic memory management is more fundamental for application programming. i agree with nemo. every time i happen to see nick stoughton i suggest they should just STOP changing C. (it doesn't work. i'll probably stop suggesting it.) one thing that gets me is that i've had people fulminate about the few minor changes in Plan 9's C compilers, because `they are not standard', yet unlike the endless tinkering in the gcc (and now Apple) world they were made by someone who at least had some close connection with the original language (not to mention a sense of style).
