[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C99 support
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: C99 support |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:14:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i |
* Roger Leigh wrote on Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:59:45PM CET:
>
> So would something like my proposed AC_PROG_CC_C99 macro be good as a
> start? It would be optional, and simply check if a compiler
> previously found with AC_PROG_CC can be put into a C99 mode. This
> would be good for what I want--a portable way to get a C99 compiler,
> and would be useful for others as well.
One thing I missed so far: if you want your macro to check for C99 mode
proper, as opposed to just a few C99 elements which happen to be useful
to you: Have you checked there is no compiler which will compile your
test program but not general C99 in its `C89 plus extensions' mode?
Regards,
Ralf
- Re: C99 support, (continued)
- Re: C99 support, Roger Leigh, 2004/11/28
- Re: C99 support, Kevin P. Fleming, 2004/11/28
- Re: C99 support, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/11/28
- Re: C99 support, Roger Leigh, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Roger Leigh, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Roger Leigh, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Austin Schutz, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: C99 support, Paul Eggert, 2004/11/30
- Re: C99 support, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/11/30
- Re: C99 support, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/11/30
- Re: C99 support, Paul Jarc, 2004/11/29
- Re: C99 support, Paul Eggert, 2004/11/30