[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99 |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:00:01 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
"Kevin P. Fleming" <address@hidden> writes:
> From a plain-old-user's point of view, I'd much rather see Roger's
> original version. I don't want to rely on undocumented autoconf
> internals any more than I have to.
Part of the motivation for keeping that stuff hidden is that we don't
want people to switch based on whether our macro "thinks" the compiler
is "C99" or "C89" or "not". They should switch based on the
particular feature that they need.
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Steven G. Johnson, 2004/12/01
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Roger Leigh, 2004/12/01
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2004/12/01
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Roger Leigh, 2004/12/02
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Kevin P. Fleming, 2004/12/02
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Kevin P. Fleming, 2004/12/02
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2004/12/02
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/12/03
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2004/12/03
- Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Kevin P. Fleming, 2004/12/03
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2004/12/02
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Steven G. Johnson, 2004/12/03
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Steven G. Johnson, 2004/12/03
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2004/12/04
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99, Dan Manthey, 2004/12/28