Am 11.08.20 um 02:52 schrieb Theo de Raadt: > > But no, WG14 are the lords and masters in the high castle, and now 6 > years after the ship sailed something Must Be Done, it must look like > They Solved The Problem, and so they'll create an incompatible API. > > Will they be heroes? No, not really. Changing the name is villainous. >
The purpose of WG14 is to codify existing practise, not to invent (see N2086 http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2086.htm, 8. and 13.). WG14 has reserved some identifiers for future extensions of the standard. E.g. those starting with mem_. Naturally, others then choose identifiers that do not conflict with this, such as explicit_bzero. But if that name is then used in the standard unchanged, it would mean that future extensions only use exactly those identifiers not reserved for future extensions. Philipp
