On Dienstag, 14. Juli 2020 07:02:36 CEST Akim Demaille wrote:
> > Le 13 juil. 2020 à 07:56, Akim Demaille <[email protected]> a écrit :
> >> Le 12 juil. 2020 à 19:47, Christian Schoenebeck
> >> <[email protected]> a écrit :>>
> >> And BTW:
> >>> The GLR parsers require a compiler for ISO C89 or later.
> >>
> >> Tough requirement! ;-)
> >
> > Yes, we could get rid of that mention, indeed. Besides, Valentin recently
> > pointed me to one very discreet place where glr.c actually had a
> > declaration after a statement, so it was actually C99.
> >
> > I'll clean that up, thanks!
>
> I'm installing this.
>
> commit 88bd814bf103123c4f820f0a4f8fee85f8a63047
> Author: Akim Demaille <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue Jul 14 06:56:15 2020 +0200
Sure, looks fine to me!
> -Except for GLR parsers (@pxref{Compiler Requirements for GLR}), the C
> -code that Bison generates requires only C89 or later. However, Bison
> -itself requires common C99 features such as declarations after
> -statements. Bison's @code{configure} script attempts to enable C99 (or
> -later) support on compilers that default to pre-C99. If your compiler
> -lacks these C99 features entirely, GCC may well be a better choice; or
> -you can try upgrading to your compiler's latest version.
> +Except for GLR parsers (which require C99), the C code that Bison generates
> +requires only C89 or later. However, Bison itself requires common C99
> +features such as declarations after statements. Bison's @code{configure}
> +script attempts to enable C99 (or later) support on compilers that default
> +to pre-C99. If your compiler lacks these C99 features entirely, GCC may
> +well be a better choice; or you can try upgrading to your compiler's
> latest +version.
That would already be far beyond my personal level of detail. :) I mean it is
absolutely correct, but you barely find a C compiler for that to be an issue
at all nowaways. Usually you would need to explicitly force a compiler to
strict ISO C89 for that to happen today.
Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck
