On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 10:45:32PM -0500 I heard the voice of Stefan Monnier, and lo! it spake thus: > > fair conformance to C89. What systems do we care about that don't > > have reasonably competent C99 support? > > "C99 support" is unclear: e.g., AFAIK, gcc doesn't fully support > C99, tho it has supported many parts of it for quite a while.
Well, hence "reasonably competent", rather than "complete" :) Total support is fairly uncommon in any mainstream compilers. Large subsets are common across most current compilers (VS being the major exception, to my knowledge). And most of the things that strike me as useful in ctwm would fit within that fairly well. The additional integral types (particularly fixed size) are topping my mind right now, but things like block scoped declarations would be useful too. OTOH, if somebody has a good reason to use complex types in ctwm, I want to see how (in much the same way that I "want" to see how you blow up a continent with pop tarts, pipe cleaners, and excess dryer lint, anyway). In contrast, a lack of that fairly common subset would be more expected in obsolescent systems (AIXV3, say). Clarifying how much real pain drawing the line in various places causes actual users is what I want to draw out here. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
