From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2495 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2002 23:47:17 -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 2461 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 23:47:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out1.apple.com) (17.254.0.52) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2002 23:47:16 -0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (A17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id gBHNlFw14352; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:47:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from scv1.apple.com (scv1.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:46:49 -0800 Received: from apple.com ([17.219.195.47]) by scv1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id gBHNlDs24144; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:47:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:19:00 -0000 Subject: Re: basic-improvements merge status Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v548) Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis , Jan Hubicka , Neil Booth , David Edelsohn , Zack Weinberg , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org To: Richard Henderson From: Matt Austern In-Reply-To: <20021217233955.GB2188@redhat.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01090.txt.bz2 On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 03:39 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > On the other hand, if you don't have a c99-compliant library, > I wonder if you should be using -std=c99 at all. Should this be something we probe for during the configure step? Unless you're building a cross compiler, we can test to see if real C99 compliance is possible. (And then the next question: is a hybrid, with the C99 core language and the C90 library, interesting? If so, what should we call it?) --Matt