lint (was: Funny mistake)

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

In article <13619 at helios.TAMU.EDU>, byron at archone.tamu.edu (Byron Rakitzis) writes:
> I don't think that a compiler has to be big in order to perform the
> tasks outlined. You are just prejudiced by the current state of 
> commercial compilers and gcc. The compiler I am working on will
> operate in two stages, a cpp/parser/ir-generator and a code-generator/
> linker, and I am aiming for a factor of 3-5x compile-time speedup over
> gcc, plus a 3-5x reduction in compiler source code size. Impossible?
> Hardly. Compilers are in a sad state these days. Really sad.

More power to you!  While you're at it, how about an _increase_ in
comment density?

But will your hand-holding compiler check that a *group* of files are
consistent?  That's what I really depend on lint for.
-- 
Seen from an MVS perspective, UNIX and MS-DOS are hard to tell apart.