This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: codingconventions.html update for new intl directory
- From: kaih at khms dot westfalen dot de (Kai Henningsen)
- To: zack at codesourcery dot com
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 09 Oct 2003 08:39:00 +0200
- Subject: Re: codingconventions.html update for new intl directory
- Comment: Unsolicited commercial mail will incur an US$100 handling fee per received mail.
- Organization: Organisation? Me?! Are you kidding?
- References: <87n0cb856t.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>
zack@codesourcery.com (Zack Weinberg) wrote on 08.10.03 in <87n0cb856t.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>:
> "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm@polyomino.org.uk> writes:
>
> > This paragraph is now misleading. All of the gcc/ directory (except maybe
> > parts of config/) uses ISO C function definitions - the files can hardly
> > any longer be considered to be written to be usable with K&R compilers,
> > but there will still be embedded K&R assumptions (other than function
> > definition style, e.g. lack of string concatentation and excess casts)
> > that should freely be converted to ISO C. While libiberty may have its own
> > requirements.
>
> alright, how about this.
>
> zw
>
> ===================================================================
> Index: htdocs/codingconventions.html
> --- htdocs/codingconventions.html 30 Jul 2003 16:52:09 -0000 1.29
> +++ htdocs/codingconventions.html 9 Oct 2003 03:23:35 -0000
(...)
I can't see any changes, especially none that explain how libiberty is
different. Wrong patch version?
MfG Kai