From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1742 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2003 02:26:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 1735 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2003 02:26:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (207.189.213.36) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Apr 2003 02:26:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 20247 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2003 02:26:33 -0000 Received: from 227.148-60-66-fuji-dsl.static.surewest.net (HELO minax) (mitchell@66.60.148.227) by www.codesourcery.com with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP; 14 Apr 2003 02:26:33 -0000 Message-ID: <003101c3022d$41bc4ff0$6900a8c0@minax> From: "Mark Mitchell" To: "Gabriel Dos Reis" Cc: "Andrew Haley" , References: <200303250642.h2P6gZ4r025932@doubledemon.codesourcery.com><16021.32483.528431.369019@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com><1049992269.27573.3.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> Subject: Re: Converting to ISO C89 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 11:21:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00622.txt.bz2 Good point. Given that, I'd prefer not to see ISO C89 patches making their way into the 3.3 branch. That seems like more disruption than we need at this point. Thanks, -- Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gabriel Dos Reis" To: "Mark Mitchell" Cc: "Andrew Haley" ; Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 6:02 AM Subject: Re: Converting to ISO C89 > Mark Mitchell writes: > > | On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 07:25, Andrew Haley wrote: > | > Mark Mitchell writes: > | > > > | > > The SC has finally finished voting on ISO C89 conversion. (The > | > > mailing list for the SC experienced some problems, which caused things > | > > to bog down a bit.) > | > > > | > > The verdict is in: it is OK to assume ISO C89 in all code in GCC > | > > proper. (In other words, libiberty and/or other libraries are not > | > > affected.) > | > > > | > > So, patches to do ISO C conversions on the mainline are hereby > | > > pre-approved with one caveat: I would appreciate it if people would > | > > wait until GCC 3.3 is out the door. The reason is that we're still > | > > applying a lot of patches to both branches, and that process is tricky > | > > enough without creating a lot of spurious merge conflicts. > | > > | > I take it that new patches which are written in ISO C may be applied > | > to the 3.3 branch. > | > | I can't see why not. > > That means that you would also have to OK the patch > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-03/msg01765.html > > for gcc-3_3-branch. > > -- Gaby >