Re: AC_PROG_CC_STDC

[Paul Eggert]

> From: Peter Eisentraut <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:59:10 -0500 (EST)
> 
> I've been thinking lately about the issues surrounding this macro (see
> archives and TODO list).  Is there any reason why AC_PROG_CC_STDC could
> not simply be folded into AC_PROG_CC?  Is there any software that must
> avoid an ANSI C compiler at all cost?

Not these days.

In the past I recall some problems with that macro, as it set options
that caused some compilers to become pedantic (e.g., to refuse to
define `fileno' in <stdio.h>, since the C standard does not allow
that).

However, I think those problems are ironed out now.  I think in
practice the main use of that macro nowadays is to define PROTOTYPES
for old code that still tries to be portable to K&R C.

A reasonable amount of GNU code still tries to be portable to K&R C.
GNU Emacs comes to mind.  However, hardly anybody actually uses K&R C
compilers anymore, except perhaps the GCC folks while bootstrapping.
So the K&R mode doesn't get tested much these days.