basic-improvements merge status

[Jan Hubicka]

> Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> | > Since it doesn't, because there no library support with
> | > it), it is *wrong* to assume it is operating in C99 mode.
> | 
> | On the other hand, if you don't have a c99-compliant library,
> | I wonder if you should be using -std=c99 at all.
> 
> No body was using -std=c99 when building libstdc++-v3.

I never claimed that the current behaviour is correct.

Honza
> 
> -- Gaby