[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options
From: |
Paul Smith |
Subject: |
Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Oct 2013 07:13:59 -0400 |
On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 05:36 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> First, time_t is supposed to be an integer or real
> (http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009696699/basedefs/sys/types.h.html).
> Its hard to blame the compiler's warning system for a broken
> implementation.
The ISO C standard does not require that time_t be signed, so while it
may not be strictly POSIX compliant, an implementation that provides
unsigned time_t is not broken from the perspective of a C compiler.
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, (continued)
Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Jeffrey Walton, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Russ Allbery, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Paul Eggert, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Jeffrey Walton, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Paul Eggert, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Jeffrey Walton, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Paul Eggert, 2013/10/29
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Jeffrey Walton, 2013/10/30
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options,
Paul Smith <=
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Paul Eggert, 2013/10/30
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Jeffrey Walton, 2013/10/30
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Paul Eggert, 2013/10/30
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Jeffrey Walton, 2013/10/30
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Paul Eggert, 2013/10/30
- Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, Russ Allbery, 2013/10/30
Re: AC_*/AM_* macros for options, David A. Wheeler, 2013/10/31