Hey,

We're not really doing anything else to enhance support, but weren't
actively going back and breaking it.

c99 should be fine going forward.
-Dormando

On Sun, 28 Sep 2008, Akira Kitada wrote:

>
> Hi Dustin,
>
> I checked the thread you pointed out.
> As you can see, my patch is simpler than one on that thread and
> it wouldn't uglify the code so much.
> However, if memcached project decided to stick with C99 and drop C90 support,
> okay, fair enough. I know I'm a minority still using a C90 compiler.
> In that case, I'd suggest dropping C90 support completely.
> The code like below made me think it still supports old compilers...
>
> /* FreeBSD 4.x doesn't have IOV_MAX exposed. */
> #ifndef IOV_MAX
> #if defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__APPLE__)
> # define IOV_MAX 1024
> #endif
> #endif
>
> /* If supported, give compiler hints for branch prediction. */
> #if !defined(__GNUC__) || (__GNUC__ == 2 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 96)
> #define __builtin_expect(x, expected_value) (x)
> #endif
>
> Cheers,
>
> Akira
>
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 3:10 AM, Dustin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >  There was a similar patch that came through recently.  I believe the
> > consensus was to not put a lot of effort into supporting older
> > systems:
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/memcached/browse_thread/thread/a546cee63d0afc9f/4e15305e4db1de48
> >
> > On Sep 27, 5:54 am, "Akira Kitada" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> The file attached fixes compile errors and warnings that appear when
> >> building with a C89 (ISO C90) compiler.
> >>
> >> - moved variable declarations to the start of a block
> >> - fixed malloc.h warning on old FreeBSD
> >> - changed to use inttypes.h if it is available and stdint.h is not.
> >> - changed to use zero-length arrays when using old gcc that does not
> >> support a flexible array member yet.
> >>  http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.2.4/gcc/Zero-Length.html
> >>
> >> I'm not sure whether C89 compiler is still supported by memcached or
> >> not, but I think
> >> it's good thing to support broader range of compilers as long as the
> >> changes will not damage the readability much.
> >>
> >> Any comments?
> >>
> >>  iso_c90_compat.diff
> >> 4KViewDownload
> >
>

Reply via email to