assuming C89?

[Jeff Johnston]

Eric Blake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> According to Jeff Johnston on 3/14/2007 12:23 PM:
>>> I know that newlib was originally started from code that predates C89,
>>> hence all the macros in <_ansi.h> such as _DEFUN, _AND, and so forth to
>>> allow compilation with either K&R prototypes or standard prototypes.  But
>>> is it still the case that K&R syntax must be supported, or can new files
>>> assume C89 and avoid the contortions?  Similarly, can we now assume that
>>> _HAVE_STDC is always defined, that <stdarg.h> always exists, and other
>>> forms of C89 assumptions, or do new files still have to cater to the
>>> possibility of obsolete <varargs.h>?
>>>
>>> - --
>> The answer is we probably could assume C89 at this point in time without
>> harm, but the work has already been done and is trivial IMO.  I wouldn't
>> remove the _DEFUN and _EXFUN macros anyway because it provides the
>> ability for a platform to add specialized function attributes to all the
>> C library function declarations or definitions (e.g. see _ansi.h and
>> __CYGWIN__ reference).
> 
> It looks like _DEFUN is not needed any more (Cygwin does not special case
> it, and we already have files like fprintf.c that fail to use it).  I
> agree that _EXFUN is still essential, but the use of _EXFUN is limited
> pretty much to headers.  I'm not going to any great lengths to clean up
> existing code, but any new code I submit will probably avoid the bulk of
> the _ansi.h macros and just assume C89.
> 

I guess I'll do it for you then.  Just because no platform now uses 
additional function attributes in _DEFUN, don't assume that no one will 
ever need or want this.

-- Jeff J.

>