This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Patch to add 4.0 version of c99status.html
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 01:42:39 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Patch to add 4.0 version of c99status.html
These patches add a version of c99status.html for 4.0, copied from the
mainline version, and adjusts the links in the manual accordingly.
Applied to 4.0 branch and wwwdocs.
--
Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)
Index: ChangeLog
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 2.7592.2.5
diff -u -r2.7592.2.5 ChangeLog
--- ChangeLog 25 Feb 2005 23:19:05 -0000 2.7592.2.5
+++ ChangeLog 26 Feb 2005 01:40:29 -0000
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2005-02-26 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
+
+ * doc/invoke.texi, doc/standards.texi: Refer to
+ gcc-4.0/c99status.html.
+
2005-02-26 Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de>
* doc/extend.texi (5.24 Declaring Attributes of Functions)<noreturn>:
Index: doc/invoke.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.583
diff -u -r1.583 invoke.texi
--- doc/invoke.texi 24 Feb 2005 09:24:17 -0000 1.583
+++ doc/invoke.texi 26 Feb 2005 01:40:34 -0000
@@ -1102,7 +1102,7 @@
@itemx iso9899:1999
@itemx iso9899:199x
ISO C99. Note that this standard is not yet fully supported; see
-@w{@uref{http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html}} for more information. The
+@w{@uref{http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/c99status.html}} for more information. The
names @samp{c9x} and @samp{iso9899:199x} are deprecated.
@item gnu89
Index: doc/standards.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/doc/standards.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -r1.18 standards.texi
--- doc/standards.texi 1 Dec 2004 02:01:36 -0000 1.18
+++ doc/standards.texi 26 Feb 2005 01:40:34 -0000
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@
A new edition of the ISO C standard was published in 1999 as ISO/IEC
9899:1999, and is commonly known as @dfn{C99}. GCC has incomplete
support for this standard version; see
-@uref{http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html} for details. To select this
+@uref{http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/c99status.html} for details. To select this
standard, use @option{-std=c99} or @option{-std=iso9899:1999}. (While in
development, drafts of this standard version were referred to as
@dfn{C9X}.)
Index: c99status.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/c99status.html,v
retrieving revision 1.40
diff -u -r1.40 c99status.html
--- c99status.html 1 Dec 2004 02:01:17 -0000 1.40
+++ c99status.html 26 Feb 2005 01:37:57 -0000
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
<p>This page describes the C99 support in mainline GCC CVS, not in any
particular release. Information is also available on <a
+href="gcc-4.0/c99status.html">C99 support in GCC 4.0</a>, <a
href="gcc-3.4/c99status.html">C99 support in GCC 3.4</a>, <a
href="gcc-3.3/c99status.html">C99 support in GCC 3.3</a>, <a
href="gcc-3.1/c99status.html">C99 support in GCC 3.1 and 3.2</a> and on <a
Index: gcc-4.0/c99status.html
===================================================================
RCS file: gcc-4.0/c99status.html
diff -N gcc-4.0/c99status.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ gcc-4.0/c99status.html 26 Feb 2005 01:37:57 -0000
@@ -0,0 +1,359 @@
+<html>
+
+<head>
+<title>Status of C99 features in GCC 4.0</title>
+</head>
+
+<body>
+<h1>Status of C99 features in GCC 4.0</h1>
+
+<p>This table is based on the list in the foreword to the printed
+standard ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E), as amended by ISO/IEC
+9899:1999/Cor.1:2001 (E) and ISO/IEC 9899:1999/Cor.2:2004 (E).</p>
+
+<p>Where "Library Issue" is listed in conjunction with some other
+status, this means that some compiler support is needed for the
+library support, or desirable in conjunction with it. Note that the
+headers required of conforming freestanding implementations (clause 4
+paragraph 6) do not count as library issues.</p>
+
+<p>This page describes the C99 support in GCC 4.0. Information on <a
+href="../c99status.html">C99 support in mainline CVS GCC</a> is also
+available.</p>
+
+<p>See below the table for further notes on some issues.</p>
+
+<table border="1">
+<tr><th>Feature</th>
+ <th>Library Issue</th>
+ <th>Done</th>
+ <th>Broken</th>
+ <th>Missing</th>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>restricted character set support via digraphs and
+ <br /><code><iso646.h></code> (originally specified in AMD1)</em></td>
+ <td></td>
+ <td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>wide character library support in
+ <code><wchar.h></code><br />and <code><wctype.h></code>
+ (originally specified in AMD1)</em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Missing</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>more precise aliasing rules via effective type</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>restricted pointers</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>variable-length arrays</em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Broken</td>
+ <td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>flexible array members</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>static</code> and type qualifiers<br />in parameter array declarators</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>complex (and imaginary) support in <code><complex.h></code></em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Broken</td>
+ <td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>type-generic math macros in <code><tgmath.h></code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>the <code>long long int</code> type and library functions</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>increased minimum translation limits</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>additional floating-point characteristics<br />in <code><float.h></code></em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>remove implicit <code>int</code></em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>reliable integer division</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>universal character names (<code>\u</code> and <code>\U</code>)</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>extended identifiers</em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Missing</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>hexadecimal floating-point constants and
+ <code>%a</code><br /> and <code>%A</code>
+ <code>printf</code>/<code>scanf</code> conversion specifiers</em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>compound literals</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td>
+ <td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>designated initializers</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td>
+ <td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>//</code> comments</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>library functions in <code><inttypes.h></code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>extended integer types in <code><stdint.h></code></em></td>
+ <td></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Missing</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>remove implicit function declaration</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>preprocessor arithmetic<br />done in <code>intmax_t</code>/<code>uintmax_t</code></em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>mixed declarations and code</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>new block scopes for selection<br />and iteration statements</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>integer constant type rules</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>integer promotion rules</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>macros with a variable number of arguments</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>the <code>vscanf</code> family of functions
+ in<br /><code><stdio.h></code> and <code><wchar.h></code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>additional math library functions in <code><math.h></code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Missing</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>floating-point environment access<br />in <code><fenv.h></code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>IEC 60559 (also known as<br />IEC 559 or IEEE arithmetic) support</em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Broken</td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>trailing comma allowed in <code>enum</code> declaration</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>%lf</code> conversion specifier<br />allowed in <code>printf</code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>inline functions</em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td>Broken</td>
+ <td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>the <code>snprintf</code> family of functions in <code><stdio.h></code></em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>boolean type in <code><stdbool.h></code></em></td>
+ <td></td>
+ <td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>idempotent type qualifiers</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>empty macro arguments</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>new struct type compatibility<br />rules (tag compatibility)</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>additional predefined macro names</em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Missing</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>_Pragma</code> preprocessing operator</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>standard pragmas</em></td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Missing</td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>__func__</code> predefined identifier</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>va_copy</code> macro</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>additional <code>strftime</code> conversion specifiers</em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td><td>Done</td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>deprecate <code>ungetc</code> at the<br />beginning of a binary file</em></td>
+ <td>Library Issue</td>
+ <td></td><td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>remove deprecation of<br />aliased array parameters</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>conversion of array to pointer not limited to lvalues</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>relaxed constraints on aggregate<br />and union initialization</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em>relaxed restrictions on portable header names</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><td><em><code>return</code> without expression not permitted
+ in<br />function that returns a value (and vice versa)</em></td>
+ <td></td><td>Done</td>
+ <td></td><td></td>
+</tr>
+
+<tr><th>Feature</th>
+ <th>Library Issue</th>
+ <th>Done</th>
+ <th>Broken</th>
+ <th>Missing</th>
+</tr>
+</table>
+
+<h2>Further notes</h2>
+
+<ul>
+
+<li>cpp has limited support for multibyte character sets.</li>
+
+<li>IEC 60559 is IEEE 754 floating point. This works if and only if
+the hardware is perfectly compliant, but GCC does not define
+<code>__STDC_IEC_559__</code> or implement the associated standard
+pragmas.</li>
+
+<li>Compiler support is needed for <code>math_errhandling</code>; see
+messages <a
+href="http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2000-06/msg00008.html";>1</a>,
+<a
+href="http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2000-06/msg00014.html";>2</a>,
+<a
+href="http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2000-06/msg00015.html";>3</a>
+on this subject to libc-hacker.</li>
+
+<li>In some places, <code>-pedantic</code> warnings don't take proper
+account of the standard version selected.</li>
+
+<li>GCC doesn't have <code>wprintf</code>, <code>wscanf</code> and
+<code>wcsftime</code> format checking support.</li>
+
+<li>Complex numbers support may be broken (some problems with
+passing/returning complex values on 64-bit targets, and not checked
+against the requirements of the C99 standard). However, the
+<code>_Complex</code> keyword now works.</li>
+
+<li>C99 <code>inline</code> functions do not generate an external
+definition if declared without <code>extern</code>, but do if declared
+with <code>extern</code>, the opposite of GCC's handling of
+<code>inline</code> and <code>extern inline</code>. This will
+probably require existing glibc headers to be fixincluded.</li>
+
+<li>The C99 semantics of variable length arrays (VLAs) are not fully
+implemented by the existing GCC extension: the concept of variably
+modified (VM) types, and the rules for what identifiers can be
+declared with VLA or VM types, are not implemented (for example, GCC
+allows elements of VM type in a structure with block scope); while the
+syntax for arrays to be declared with <code>[*]</code> in parameter
+declarations is present, the semantics are not; and in general the
+implementation of VLAs has not been checked against C99 requirements.</li>
+
+<li><code>const</code>-qualified compound literals could share storage
+with each other and with string literals, but currently don't.</li>
+
+<li>The information provided by <code>static</code> in parameter array
+declarators is not used for optimization. It might make sense to use
+it in future in conjunction with <a href="../projects/prefetch.html">work
+on prefetching</a>.</li>
+
+<li>The list above differs from that in the C99 standard (as amended
+by TC1) as follows:
+"LIA compatibility annex" is removed, since it refers to C99's
+conformance to another standard rather than something for C
+implementations to do. The <code><stdint.h></code> and
+<code><inttypes.h></code> entries have been separated, but are a
+single entry in C99.</li>
+
+</ul>
+
+</body>
+</html>