linux-2.5 min()/max() macros generate warnings with gcc-3.0.4and gcc-3.2

[Matthew Wilcox]

Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> The warning is appropriately conditioned on whether you're in C99 mode.  
> If you use -std=c99 or -std=gnu99 you won't get the warning (but Linux
> uses at least one feature only permitted in gnu89 mode, treating compound
> literals as values that can be used in static initializers rather than
> references to anonymous variables which is the C99 notion).

But... this is behaviour which changed between gcc 2.96 and 3.0.
Seems to me the "gnu89" definition has been retroactively changed to
disallow this feature.  And I don't understand why you wouldn't want
this feature to be part of gnu89 anyway.  Can you elucidate?

-- 
Revolutions do not require corporate support.