This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Convert 3.2 sources to ISO C90
- From: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>
- To: law at redhat dot com
- Cc: Marc Espie <espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 10:01:56 -0700
- Subject: Re: Convert 3.2 sources to ISO C90
- Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
- References: <9204.1023381802@porcupine.cygnus.com>
law@redhat.com wrote:
>
> In message <3CFF8DC8.31ED5081@apple.com>, Stan Shebs writes:
> > But I don't have one, nor do most GCC developers. We basically
> > have to rely on the handful of HP maintainers to be the oracles
> > of whether GCC is properly K&R compatible.
> Oh please. The stuff we're talking about is trivial -- don't use
> prototypes. Jesus.
Or anything else in ISO C, like string concatenation.
> > OK, so let me get this straight - GCC has to have K&R compat because
> > Red Hat has customers who are too stingy to spring for acc, but who must
> > have spent lots of money on a support contract if they're getting onsite
> > support.
> Get real. Why should anyone (Red Hat customer or not) have to purchase the
> unbundled HP compiler to bootstrap GCC. The whole point behind that
> was to provide a real world example of the kinds of problems we're going to
> run into if you start ANSI-ifying GCC.
How do people bootstrap on Solaris? They buy a compiler, or use
a binary package. How do people get started on Windows? They cross
compile, or use a binary package. HP is the one oddball here.
Stan