From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: From: erik quanstrom Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 19:26:56 -0500 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] impressive MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4608a7da-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 gcc 4 can be c99 compliant. gcc '--std=c99' $* but that doesn't mean that they removed the extensions. linux is dependent on inline assembly, for example. (i'm not sure why they think it necessiary.) so a number of their extensions won't go away. in fact, other compilers, like tcc, feel compelled to replicate gnu extensions. - erik On Tue Apr 25 15:02:51 CDT 2006, cross@math.psu.edu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 01:02:30PM +1000, Andy Newman wrote: > > I like this quote from the glibc FAQ... > > > > 1.2. What compiler do I need to build GNU libc? > > > > ... A lot of extensions of GNU CC are used to increase portability ... > > I remember a year or two picking up a Linux rag at the train station on the > way back from somewhere. They were talking about gcc 4 or something in it > and saying how they were hoping to do away with a lot of GNU extensions by > stricter adherence to the language standards in the compiler itself; I guess > that work got buried. Then again, this was a cursory read on the Subway, > and I'm slightly dyslexic, so maybe read it the opposite way it was meant. > > - Dan C. >