Re: Getting AC_PROG_CC_C99

[Paul Eggert]

On 09/29/11 02:14, Bruno Haible wrote:
> But switching the compiler to a different standards-compliance
> mode is a global effect. I was not sure whether it would have some negative
> side effects on some platforms.
> 
> On the other hand, we do it in module 'stdarg' for 5 years now, and it has
> not caused bug reports.

I agree on both points.  I think the only thing that's saved us is that
most gnulib-using projects already ask for C99 compatibility if available,
for the usual reasons.

On 09/28/11 22:28, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> The patch is very straight forward:
> 
> AC_DEFUN([AC_PROG_CC_C99], [
> ...
> m4_define([AC_PROG_CC_C99])
> ])

I don't think the autoconf patch would be that easy, as one would
need to handle a mixture of AC_PROG_CC_C99, AC_PROG_CC_C89, and
AC_PROG_CC_STDC calls.  Again, I expect the only thing that's
saved us is that people just use AC_PROG_CC_STDC.  Hmm, maybe
Autoconf should deprecate the other two macros?