This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils 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: Macros and K&R


> Boris Tschirschwitz <boris@math.ubc.ca> writes:
> 
> 
>> I am wondering if more macro facilities would be welcome in 'gas' or if
>> they should go into 'gasp'.
> 
> 
> gasp is obsolete, so they definitely shouldn't go there.
> 
> 
>> On a side note: Is there another good reason for sticking to K&R C syntax
>> besides the amount of time it would take to change it?
> 
> 
> There are still systems out there which have only K&R C compilers.
> People on those systems can compile gcc, but in some cases they also
> need the binutils to be working in order to use gcc.  Therefore, gcc
> and the binutils continue to stick to K&R C.


But is this realistic?

A target so old that it doesn't have some sort of ISO C compiler is 
probably so pathetically under powered that it will take a month to to 
even stage1 build GCC from scratch.

I think such targets would either:


	o	have an existing GCC port

	o	end up having GCC et.al. ported
		to them via a canadian cross.


enjoy,
Andrew


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