On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 17:48:48 -0500 "Keith Medcalf" <kmedc...@dessus.com> wrote:
> Microsoft products require multiple versions of multiple Microsoft > and third-party compilers to compile any of their products. They > will simply add whatever is needed to their internal compilers suite > and use that to build the winsqlite.dll Interesting to know. I was only suggesting the possibility that the internal calculus at Microsoft might be affected by the number of lines of C11 source they have to compile. Surely there's some pocket of modernity somewhere along Only One Microsoft Way. > The only issue I've run into using a Microsoft compiler is that it > does not handle in-block initialization and declarations -- they all > have to be at the top of a function before the first "executable" > statement. I believe that was a C language restriction back in the > early 70's. I'm pretty sure top of scope is OK, too. You can declare variables as the first statement inside any brace, afaik. You're fortunate that's the only issue you encountered. When I was using Microsoft's C++ intensively, I would find a compiler bug about once a month. Very often the solution was to use a typedef or eliminate one. (They're not alone. On a current C project, GNU fell down passing a struct parameter by value (not as a pointer). The received value was just garbled. I'm not sure why, but it seems that at a certain level of complexity every compiler ties its shoelaces together. --jkl _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
