From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 9 14:28:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66020106566C for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:28:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C12308FC14 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:28:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from christoph.mallon@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 Jan 2009 14:28:21 -0000 Received: from p54A3E499.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO tron.homeunix.org) [84.163.228.153] by mail.gmx.net (mp049) with SMTP; 09 Jan 2009 15:28:21 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1673122 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19TVFYtaAJTXAV8i5uHzhcYuaYvar/d0muXW9cAYg FQt8WFX2zRfZgV Message-ID: <49675F04.20006@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:28:20 +0100 From: Christoph Mallon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roman Divacky References: <49668763.8020705@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20090108233311.GA69883@keltia.freenix.fr> <20090109031147.GB44317@duncan.reilly.home> <49672189.5060109@gmx.de> <20090109110508.GA12123@freebsd.org> <496751D1.20605@gmx.de> <20090109134725.GA38233@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20090109134725.GA38233@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.63 Cc: Andrew Reilly , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Ollivier Robert Subject: Re: gcc 4.3: when will it become standard compiler? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:28:24 -0000 Roman Divacky schrieb: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 02:32:01PM +0100, Christoph Mallon wrote: >> Roman Divacky schrieb: >>>> I'm not saying it's wrong to look for alternatives, but you cannot just >>>> change your system compiler like you change underwear. >>> well... the first step is imho starting to compile world with C99... >>> that might reveal some bugs, note that as of a few months ago >>> 8-current compiles cleanly with C99, that does not mean that it's >>> working when you run those programs correctly :) >> One step in the right direction is embracing the nice features modern C >> offers you. For example declaring a variable right were you need it >> instead of dozens of lines away is one such nice thing which improves >> readability. Designated initializers improve readability, too. >> But I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "compile world with C99". C99 >> is pretty much backwards compatible to C89. > > sorry for the bad wording - I meant to turn C99 compilation on default. > We compile in gnu89 mode now. I still have no idea what you mean. Sure, you can specify -std=c99 (or more likely gnu99), but an int is still an int - what do you expect? In fact default mode of GCC accepts many C99 constructs like // comments and mixed declarations and code, which are not valid C89.