This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
> I already did, when I brought the point to U.D., regex.[ch] is use in > many packages and will not compile without an ANSI C. I'm a bit worry that > next time I'll look, it will need not only an ANSI C comp. but gcc. There has been no suggestion to reduce the level of support for ANSI C compilers other than GCC, and I don't think that retaining portability to all ANSI C compliant compilers will be a problem in the future. I think that the libc team will happily continue to accept reports of nonportability to ANSI C compilers for these shared files as bonafide bugs. The remaining question is, is portability to non-ANSI C compilers is important to you at all, and if so, can you just you ansi2knr or protoize and be happy?
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |