This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: patch: cp/search.c broken
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 02:25:35AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On 25 Nov 2001, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
> > search.c doesn't compile because there is an attempt to declare bk in
> > the body of a function-- not after curly's. this isn't c++ guys :)
>
> It's perfectly valid C99. I asked before without an answer, I'll ask
> again: non-C front ends can require GCC, what GCC version can they
> require? That is, what native compiler version should people have
> installed before building a cross compiler?
i think the bottom line is k&r. isn't it?
just because it's valid c99 doesn't mean we should use it in gcc
source code. we should probably stick to the lowest common (sane)
denomitor (k&r?).
i was bootstrapping with 2.95.3. i don't know what the regression tester
was using, but it died too.
aldy