This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][RFC] Automatized pattern matching
On Sat, 7 Jun 2003, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> "You need to provide a function prototype for every function before you
> use it, and functions had to be defined K+R style. The function
> prototype should have used the PARAMS macro, which takes a single
> argument. Therefore the parameter list had to be enclosed in
> parentheses. For example, ..."
The K&R information in README.Portability was deliberately moved to the
end. It is only relevant for code in projects that still use K&R
(libiberty?) and for knowing what to look for and remove when converting
to ISO C.
No-one has updated the GCC Coding Conventions for the move to ISO C, but
it was announced on the gcc list
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-03/msg01508.html> and extensively
discussed both before and afterwards, so the threads would have been
difficult to miss. The revsion of README.Portability was also discussed.
But perhaps we could do with a gcc-dev-announce list (which has
announcements of all changes and clarifications to coding conventions and
procedures, changes to existing front end and back end interfaces, release
schedule announcements, ..., but no discussion). That would make more
sense than some suggested splits, if people remembered to announce things
to it.
(The link to README.Portability should stay, but codingconventions.html
should say something to the effect of "Code in GCC is written in ISO C90;
macros such as PARAMS defined purely for compatibility with pre-standard
compilers should not be used, and functions should be defined with
ISO-style definitions, although the CONCAT[234] and STRINGX macros should
still be used where appropriate (for convenience, not for K&R
compatibility). Front ends other than C may use GNU C extensions.")
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk