From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15130 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2004 03:59:24 -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 15107 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2004 03:59:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.aaronwl.com) (68.228.0.128) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Nov 2004 03:59:19 -0000 Received: from [70.182.14.214] (cdm-70-182-14-214.laft.cox-internet.com [70.182.14.214]) by mail.aaronwl.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAP3xJu9001546 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:59:19 GMT Message-ID: <41A55897.4070804@aaronwl.com> Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:42:00 -0000 From: "Aaron W. LaFramboise" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: gcc mailing list Subject: Re: generalized lvalues References: <8AD5AEEF-3914-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> In-Reply-To: <8AD5AEEF-3914-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00940.txt.bz2 As a user, while I know its a little too late to be concerned, this concerns me in that some of the code I may be interested in compiling with GCC may use this extension. The maintainers of this code may be unwilling to 'fix' it, and hearing that it breaks GCC may be reason for them to leave it broken perpetually. So, from a political perspective, this may not be a good thing, as some proprietary software developers who are vaguely hostile towards GNU may use this change in GCC as a way to further lock out non-proprietary compilers. I sympathize with the notion that extensions to the standard should be approached conservatively and with much care. But what about the case where that extension is widely used and all comparable compilers support it? Are there any widely-used C compilers out that that _don't_ implement the pointer case of this extension? Aaron W. LaFramboise