From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22273 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2003 17:59:33 -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 22265 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2003 17:59:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO uniton.integrable-solutions.net) (62.212.99.186) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Apr 2003 17:59:33 -0000 Received: from uniton.integrable-solutions.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h3CHs1H2001595; Sat, 12 Apr 2003 19:54:01 +0200 Received: (from gdr@localhost) by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id h3CHs0JQ001594; Sat, 12 Apr 2003 19:54:00 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: uniton.integrable-solutions.net: gdr set sender to gdr@integrable-solutions.net using -f To: Mark Mitchell Cc: Andrew Haley , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Converting to ISO C89 References: <200303250642.h2P6gZ4r025932@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> <16021.32483.528431.369019@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> <1049992269.27573.3.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> From: Gabriel Dos Reis Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 19:32:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1049992269.27573.3.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> Organization: Integrable Solutions Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00600.txt.bz2 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