This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: basic-improvements merge status

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
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: 17 Dec 2002 09:49:48 +0100
Subject: Re: basic-improvements merge status
Organization: Integrable Solutions
References: <20021216224439.GF3138@kam.mff.cuni.cz><164D0268-114E-11D7-8A5A-003065C86F94@apple.com><20021216235608.GN3138@kam.mff.cuni.cz>

Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz> writes:

| > 
| > 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 
| > >(and
| > >thats why libstdc++ does it).
| > 
| > According to the C99 standard, this is right, but GCC does not control 
| > the
| > runtime libraries.  What should the behavior of -std=c99 be, when 
| > generating code
| > for a target with non-C99-conformant libraries?
| 
| I don't know.  It is interesting combination at least (like C without
| runtime).
| It would be best to push these into libgcc when runtime does not
| overwrite these.  Is that doable?  

Does that mean that GCC will also provide a C library?

-- Gaby

Follow-Ups:
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Joseph S. Myers

References:
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Dale Johannesen
- Re: basic-improvements merge status
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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