This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: proposed Opengroup action for c99 command (XCU ERN 76)


Ross Ridge wrote:
> GCC doesn't use (A), (B) or (C).  GCC doesn't conform to C99 and
> any implementation of "c99" that uses GCC would presumably also be
> non-conforming.
  
Robert Dewar wrote:
> What exactly is the observable non-conformance?

Ross Ridge wrote:
> GCC doesn't claim C99 conformance.  The following URL lists a number of
> different areas in which GCC is known not to conform:
> 
> 	http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html
 
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> How does the fact that gcc does not currently conform to C99 imply
> that gcc doesn't use (A), (B), or (C)?
 
It doesn't, the implication is the other way around.  But if you're
asking for "observable non-conformance" then there are lot more obvious
ways to observe it than by showing that GCC doesn't use (A), (B) or (C).

> In any case, the general goal is to conform to C99, so it still makes
> sense to discuss this.

Maybe, but there's no implementation of (A) or (C) in GCC that would
make requiring (B) a burden.  So I think Paul Eggert's question has
been answered.

						Ross Ridge


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]