This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
- From: Mike Stump <mstump at apple dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:35:19 -0800
- Subject: Re: ANSIfy cp/parser.c
On Wednesday, January 8, 2003, at 08:32 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:
Bootstrapped on i686-pc-linux-gnu. OK to commit?
I'm doing these one file at a time because they're *huge* (and
because I
have to do most of it by hand). I'm asking
for approval because the ANSIfication of the function defintions (the
way formal parameters are specified) doesn't appear to fall under the
'obvious' rule. If someone says it does, I'll start putting these in
as soon as they bootstrap. :-)
I have ambitions of applying the new parser to C as well as C++;
therefore I would appreciate this *not* being applied, unless we are
going to reexamine the requirement for K+R C in the C front end.
Sun dropped /bin/cc, and we managed. 10 years to take up a new
standard seems like plenty enough time, I say we announce that in 3.4
we mandate a C89+ compiler, and just do it. This will cause far fewer
problems, and those problems will be trivial to work around, when
compared to the new C++ parser, which we've already done.