Re: void main (no, not a long one)

[Michael T. Babcock]

Well said, considering how often DJB waxes eloquent about non-standards
compliant and/or broken software.

Paul Jarc wrote:

> Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Theoretically, "void main" is wrong. In practice, it works just
> > fine. Personally, I could not care less.
>
> Theoretically, BIND's noncompliance with standards is wrong.  In
> practice, it interoperates with most of the world (i.e., itself) just
> fine.  But I care.