From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <3e1162e60604071257q646c54f7vf50ac6dcaaf900d6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri,  7 Apr 2006 12:57:42 -0700
From: "David Leimbach" <leimy2k@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Good enough approximation for ape/pcc
In-Reply-To: <01d4330ec0c4d7a026e6d381befe4ece@cat-v.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1d5d51400604071201n5f308eeco519feb9d76023d62@mail.gmail.com>
	<01d4330ec0c4d7a026e6d381befe4ece@cat-v.org>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 32eed49e-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On 4/7/06, uriel@cat-v.org <uriel@cat-v.org> wrote:
> Writing code that will compile with ?c is just matter good style, ie.,
> not (ab)using cpp, not using gcc extensions and so on; see
> /sys/doc/comp.ps for details. Ape doesn't not even come into the
> picture, no sane C code should ever need to use cpp(1)
>

Does pcc do C99?  Anyone know how much or how little?

Dave