[Bug c++/27235] goto crossing P.O.D. initialization

[gdr at integrable-solutions dot net]

------- Comment #16 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2006-05-01 23:30 -------
Subject: Re:  goto crossing P.O.D. initialization

"falk at debian dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

| ------- Comment #15 from falk at debian dot org  2006-05-01 20:55 -------
| (In reply to comment #12)
| > Subject: Re:  goto crossing P.O.D. initialization
| > 
| > "falk at debian dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| > 
| > | I think this is a valid request. While random language extensions aren't
| > | useful,
| > | compatibility with C99 is. Maybe somebody else can comment on this...
| > 
| > You have to be more precise about what you mean by C99 compatibility.
| 
| I have trouble seeing what might be unclear about this term.

I suspect part of the problem is that everybody believes that his/her uses
of the term are so clear that they he/she has trouble seeing anybody
disagree with him/her.

| I mean that code
| that is valid C99 is accepted in C++ unless there is a good reason not to.

And why not the other way around?  I mean, codes that is valid C++ is
accepted in C99 unless there is good reason not to.  As far as I can
see, that also is compatibility.

| just like most of C89 is accepted in C++ unless there is a good reason not
to.

I suspect this is might be one the places things needs to be explained.  

If 

   * only a subset of C89 is valid  C++ and has same meaning as in C++,
   * C99 has carefully departed from both C89 and C++

why is it that "code that is valid C99 is accepted C++ unless there is
a good reason not to"?  

-- Gaby


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27235