I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even that
compiler added this extension in the early 90s.
No, it didn't. The MSVC version that we currently use (VS 2008) still
doesn't support it.
Regards,
Marti
On 02.05.2012 15:37, Matt Joiner wrote:
On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, "Antoine Pitrou" mailto:solip...@pitrou.net>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
> Larry Hastings mailto:la...@hastings.org>> wrote:
> >
> > I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its
name
>
I don't have the time to figure it out right now, but I'll look more
into it later.
I recently did an analysis here:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-January/115375.html
The motivation for C++ compilation is gone meanwhile, as VS now supports
C in WinRT apps quite well. Howev
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Larry Hastings wrote:
>> Do we officially support any C compilers that *don't* permit "intermingled
>> variable declarations and code"? Do we *unofficially* support any? And if
>> we do, what do we gain?
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Larry Hastings wrote:
> Do we officially support any C compilers that *don't* permit "intermingled
> variable declarations and code"? Do we *unofficially* support any? And if
> we do, what do we gain?
This might be of interest:
http://herbsutter.com/2012/05/03/
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> I'm not sure if MSVC and MSVC++ are the same thing, but I surely remember
> reports by MSVC users only a few years ago that Cython generated C code
> contained a declaration after an executed code at some point, and that
> failed to compile f
On Wed, 02 May 2012 21:37:35 +0800, Matt Joiner wrote:
> On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
> > Larry Hastings wrote:
> > >
> > > I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
> > > rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz
Matt Joiner, 02.05.2012 15:37:
> On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
>> Larry Hastings wrote:
>>>
>>> I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
>>> rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even tha
On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
>
> On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
> Larry Hastings wrote:
> >
> > I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
> > rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even that
> > compiler added this extens
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
Larry Hastings wrote:
>
> I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
> rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even that
> compiler added this extension in the early 90s.
>
> Do we officially support any C co
Right now the CPython trunk religiously declares all variables at the
tops of scopes, before any code, because this is all C89 permits. Back
in the 90s all the C compilers took a page out of the C++ playbook and
independently, but nearly without exception, extended the language to
allow you
11 matches
Mail list logo
