Using __STDC_VERSION__ macro

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 2 February 2017 at 13:55, Mason wrote:
> On 02/02/2017 14:52, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 2 February 2017 at 13:48, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>>> However, it yields false positives on code that doesn't contain any
>>> ambiguity (and is easier to read than lengthier code), such as:
>>>
>>> #if __STDC_VERSION__ < 199901L
>>>
>>> Since __STDC_VERSION__ is a standard macro, it is quite obvious that
>>> even if __STDC_VERSION__ is not defined, this is not a typo. So, IMHO,
>>> -Wundef should whitelist some common macros (and/or perhaps let the
>>> user provide his own whitelist).
>>
>> Yes, it seems reasonable to not warn for __STDC_VERSION__ in C89 mode.
>>
>> If you spell it wrong it won't match the whitelist and so you'll still
>> get a warning.
>
> Should we open an enhancement request on the bugzilla?

Yes please.