This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Time for GCC 5.0? (TIC)
On 11/11/2012 04:47 AM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 11/10/2012 04:45 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>>> Making c99 the default for gcc would be a great candidate for this.
>>> IIUC, gcc without -std=c99 will compile for c89. And if I read the
>>> manual correctly, it's because c99 isn't finished yet. gcc 5.0 should
>>> have a complete c99.
>>
>> "Should" in what sense? The missing features are either library issues that
>> we can't do anything about or things that no-one cares about enough to
>> fix. GCC is, to all intents and purposes, C99 compatible.
>>
>> See http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html
>
> The manual doesn't imply that:
>
> "-std=gnu99 GNU dialect of ISO C99. When ISO C99 is fully implemented
> in GCC, this will become the default."
>
> So from the perspective of the user reading the manual entry for the
> gnu99 option, the only feedback is 1) c99 isn't done, and 2) there's
> some plan to finish it and then make it the default.
>
> You seem to imply that it's as done as it'll ever realistically be.
I can't possibly know that: someone might decide to do the last bit of
work to be able to claim full compatibility. Nonetheless, I agree
with Joseph's opinion that it would be reasonable to make gnu99 the
default.
> Sounds kind of conflicting.
I think the statement in the manual is a bit idealistic.
Andrew.