C++ PATCH: PR 20599 (1/3)

[Joe Buck]

On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 01:57:14PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2006, at 9:38 AM, Joe Buck wrote:
> >Unless I'm missing something, I think it should be the default.
> 
> At times it amazes me that a 7 year old language standard isn't the  
> default (c99).  I think I'd rather have g++ at least be the most  
> recent language standard with older projects requesting older  
> standards, if they need to; though, I've not seen a clamor for c99 to  
> be the default.  Indeed, Geoff is sitting on c99 conformance fixes for  
> 4.3, in part, because there is no demand for them in 4.2.

The differences between c++03 and c++-whatever-the-number is are
trivial; c99 is a much bigger jump.