[Top][All Lists]

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


From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: AC_PROG_CC_C99
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:00:16 -0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)

Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:

>> People's code shouldn't assume the features of
>> C89 that are incompatible with C99.
> This is a good notion, IMVHO.  Unfortunately, it conflicts with
>   ( Portability
> where the infamous `error' example is advocated to be used without
> prototype.

C99 doesn't require prototypes, so that alone doesn't violate the
principle cited above.

However, I agree that the coding standards use of "error" are not
compatible with C99 for a different reason -- implicit int -- where
the coding standards already suggest conforming to C99 and so the
"error" example doesn't even follow the coding standards.  I've just
sent off a bug report about this to bug-standards, and CC'ed it to

reply via email to

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