> replace "pure C89" with "C89 compatible" Not even English has the "purity" that you subliminally presuppose in your (entirely unnecessary) assertions. See e.

> replace "pure C89" with "C89 compatible" Not even English has the "purity" that you subliminally presuppose in your (entirely unnecessary) assertions. See e.g. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pure?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pure?utm_campaign.... And not a single one of your arguments had to do with "language purity"; instead you nit-picked about naming and features you miss; so what? But hey, it's open source: impress the world with your own version of the library.