From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (wildebeest.demon.nl [212.238.236.112]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFD9C3858022 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 20:21:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org AFD9C3858022 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: from reform (deer0x0b.wildebeest.org [172.31.17.141]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 294353000ADC; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 22:21:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: by reform (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7730D2E806B9; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 22:21:49 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 22:21:49 +0200 From: Mark Wielaard To: Adrian Ratiu Cc: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org, manojgupta@chromium.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] configure.ac: drop unnecessary gnu99 extension checks Message-ID: References: <20210810125651.3075622-1-adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210810125651.3075622-1-adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Elfutils-devel mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 20:21:53 -0000 Hi Adrian, On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 03:56:51PM +0300, Adrian Ratiu via Elfutils-devel wrote: > So in the interest of enabling Clang builds we remove the only > remaining blocker: the configure checks for nested functions and > variable length arrays which are also unused. Can we just remove the whole configure test? And change the AC_PROG_CC to AC_PROG_CC_C99? The patch doesn't update the comments about what is being tested, and the only thing being tested now is Mixed Declarations and Code, which is a standard part of C99. Have you tried running make check with an alternative compiler? There are a couple of "self tests" which run the code on the just produced binaries and it would be interesting to know whether or not all tests pass. Thanks, Mark