[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99 |
Date: |
Fri, 30 Sep 2011 07:02:36 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 |
On 09/30/11 02:06, Bruno Haible wrote:
> -- Macro: AC_PROG_CC_STDC
> If the C compiler cannot compile ISO Standard C (currently C99),
> ...
>
> sounds like this macro will then be modified to enable C1X instead of C99.
Yes.
> But I expect that many packages will not need this.
It shouldn't hurt if they use it. No packages that I know
of require C99 and break with C1x. On the contrary, the
more typical case is a package that uses C1x features if
available.
The macro AC_PROG_CC_STDC means "Use the most-recent
version of C that's supported", not "Require the most-recent
version of C and fail if it's not supported". All
gnulib modules (and all packages) should work in such an
environment.
I'm assuming that C1x will be close to its draft; if it changes,
so that C1x is undesirable in important and plausible cases, we'd
have to address that. I doubt whether this will be an issue,
though.
- Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/28
- Re: Fwd: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/28
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Andrew W. Nosenko, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Paul Eggert, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/30
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Gary V. Vaughan, 2011/09/29
- Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99, Bruno Haible, 2011/09/30