[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99
From: |
Noah Misch |
Subject: |
Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99 |
Date: |
Tue, 4 Jan 2005 18:17:39 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 03:59:44PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Noah Misch <address@hidden> writes:
> > will it work for AC_PROG_CC_C89 (via AC_PROG_CC) to add the
> > C89-tolerance option, and for AC_PROG_CC_99 to then try to add the
> > C99-tolerance option in addition?
>
> Good question. We'd rather have it do C99 from day one in that case,
> I suppose. Roger?
I don't think that's necessary. See the patch below, for example.
> mostly upwards compatible with C89. I suspect that most compilers
> that can do either, will be in C99ish mode by default.
Not gcc (3.4.1).
2005-01-04 Noah Misch <address@hidden>
* lib/autoconf/c.m4 (_AC_PROG_CC_C99): Remove $ac_cv_prog_cc_c89 from
$CC before testing the C99 flags. If we do not add a flag for C99,
restore the C89 flag when finished.
diff -urp -X dontdiff ac-clean/lib/autoconf/c.m4 ac-c89c99/lib/autoconf/c.m4
--- ac-clean/lib/autoconf/c.m4 2005-01-03 07:02:43.728681271 -0500
+++ ac-c89c99/lib/autoconf/c.m4 2005-01-04 21:07:02.679032816 -0500
@@ -913,7 +913,12 @@ AC_DEFUN([_AC_PROG_CC_C99],
[AC_MSG_CHECKING([for $CC option to accept ISO C99])
AC_CACHE_VAL(ac_cv_prog_cc_c99,
[ac_cv_prog_cc_c99=no
-ac_save_CC=$CC
+# Temporarily remove any C89-related option.
+ac_save_CC_c89=$CC
+case "x$ac_cv_prog_cc_c89" in
+ x|xno) ac_save_CC=$CC ;;
+ *) ac_save_CC=`echo "$CC" | sed "s| $ac_cv_prog_cc_c89||g"` ;;
+esac
AC_LANG_CONFTEST([AC_LANG_PROGRAM(
[[#include <stdarg.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
@@ -1031,7 +1036,7 @@ done
rm -f conftest.err conftest.$ac_objext conftest.$ac_ext
case "x$ac_cv_prog_cc_c99" in
x|xno)
- CC="$ac_save_CC" ;;
+ CC="$ac_save_CC_c89" ;;
*)
CC="$ac_save_CC $ac_cv_prog_cc_c99" ;;
esac
- 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 <=
- 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, 2005/01/05