[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gnutls-dev
Subject:    Re: [gnutls-devel] C99?
From:       Tim Ruehsen <tim.ruehsen () gmx ! de>
Date:       2016-07-28 15:01:44
Message-ID: 2149067.Hz4Pvpc4Cc () blitz-lx
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Thursday, July 28, 2016 5:51:22 PM CEST Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <n.mavrogiannopoulos@gmail.com>
> > Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:21:08 +0200
> > Cc: GnuTLS development list <gnutls-devel@lists.gnutls.org>, Eli Zaretskii
> > <eliz@gnu.org>,> 
> > 	Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>
> > 
> > It's funny that C99 was always a considered a new thing as long as I
> > can remember. I think after 17 years is time to consider it something
> > old and support it by default :)
> 
> Latest versions of GCC do.

Many of the 1990ies GCC extensions went into the C99 standard.
So maybe even very old (20+ years) versions of GCC are good enough - but 
really... anyone using GCC 3.x to compile 2016 C sources ?

I still use 2.95.3 for one customer (and I guess even 2.7 on an old SCO 
development system - but used rarely and thus currently down)... but hey, I 
would never even try to compile GnuTLS 5.3.x there :-))

Regards, Tim

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Gnutls-devel mailing list
Gnutls-devel@lists.gnutls.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnutls-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]