[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Kevin P. Fleming
Subject: Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:06:29 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)

Paul Eggert wrote:

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.

Hmm... I see your point, but wouldn't that then mean that the macro would need to individually test for each C99 feature and store the results into variables for the configure script to check? Even using the variable you proposed earlier, the user would still only know "yes or no" for C99 support, unless I misunderstood.

Switching based on particular features they need sounds scary to me; in a project where there are multiple developers who have been told "our project demands C99 support from the build system", they will feel free to use C99 features wherever they want. This might not get communicated to the person in charge of, and so the project could suddenly stop building on systems it used to build on because that compiler doesn't support all C99 features. This is a very hairy problem to solve, no doubt.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]