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: New ARI warning Wed May 23 01:55:03 UTC 2012


> OpenBSD/vax, OpenBSD/m68k and OpenBSD/m88k are still stuck with GCC
> 2.95, which is almost, but not quite C99.  However, it's been ages
> since I've last built GDB on any of those platforms.  So it's probably
> time to stop caring about those platforms.  I fear that GDB has become
> too bloated to be able to build it a typical machine that runs these
> specific OpenBSD versions.  But even GCC 2.95 supports long long as an
> extension to C90.
>
> So I'd have no objection to requiring C99

Instead of unilaterally allowing C99, can we instead explicitly
define which parts of C99 we allow, and list them specifically?

> , except for one
> style-related issue.  I really, really hate mixing declarations with
> code (something that C99 started to allow).  So if we switch to
> requiring C99, I think we should add a rule to the coding standards
> that variables may only be declared at the start of a block.

I agree with this recommendation.

-- 
Joel


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]