This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: basic-improvements merge status
- From: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
- To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>, David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>, Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, rth at cygnus dot com
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:27:31 -0800
- Subject: Re: basic-improvements merge status
On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 03:56 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 02:44 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On C99 and C++ it is always valid as runtime is required to have it
thats why libstdc++ does it).
According to the C99 standard, this is right, but GCC does not control
runtime libraries. What should the behavior of -std=c99 be, when
for a target with non-C99-conformant libraries?
I don't know. It is interesting combination at least (like C without
"C without runtime" is known as "freestanding" in the standard, and
is actually well defined. Is this something we want to support though?