This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [no-commit-intention] Naive unnamed fields for main_type [Re: [patch] Fix gdb-gdb.py for flds_bnds copy-pastes]

> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 16:36:42 +0100
> From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:16:21 +0100, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > Personally, I don't know what the obstacles are for switching to C99
> > (technical, FSF policy?).
> 
> I do not see anything even close to C90 compatibility, there are tons of
> errors with `gcc -std=c90 -pedantic', `sort -u' of them below.

Even so, there's a difference between allowing several popular
extensions to C90 and _requiring_ C99.
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]