[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99
From: |
Roger Leigh |
Subject: |
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99 |
Date: |
Wed, 05 Jan 2005 22:15:16 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
>> Certainly nobody depends on AC_PROG_CC_STDC making the compiler
>> accept C99, so perhaps we only stand to surprise people by giving it
>> that meaning?
>
> Well, it was marked as obsolete. :-)
>
> To be honest I don't think it'll cause that many problems, as C99 is
> mostly upwards compatible with C89. I suspect that most compilers
> that can do either, will be in C99ish mode by default.
Yes. I think anyone who is still using AC_PROG_CC_STDC will not
notice any change unless they are doing something very unusual. I
think you could regard it as "please make the compiler comply with the
most recent standard possible". But if you want a specific mode, you
should use one of the specific macros.
Regards,
Roger
- --
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iD8DBQFB3GbyVcFcaSW/uEgRAm3XAKDznbOrPXn6fJ34S1c8yGGz8mnlQgCg069s
RC/lyrhh7UEFHTpwSdUXFJE=
=efI5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Roger Leigh, 2005/01/01
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2005/01/03
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Noah Misch, 2005/01/04
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2005/01/04
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Noah Misch, 2005/01/04
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Roger Leigh, 2005/01/05
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Noah Misch, 2005/01/09
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Roger Leigh, 2005/01/12
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Noah Misch, 2005/01/13
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99,
Roger Leigh <=