[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Portability of preprocessor directives
|
From: |
Thomas Dickey |
|
Subject: |
Re: Portability of preprocessor directives |
|
Date: |
Tue, 25 Feb 2003 19:24:45 -0500 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.27i |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 04:14:19PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Thomas Dickey <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > there are known cases for pre-ANSI compilers which violated the rules.
>
> Of course. But he wrote that he was "still interested (to some
> degree) in pre-ANSI compilers". I took this to have its usual
> meaning.
>
> That is, I assume he's mildly interested in pre-ANSI compilers that
> shipped some time in the last decade or so; that he's not at all
> interested in the original Unix Version 7 C compiler, which is long
> dead; and that his interest level in other nonstandard compilers
> primarily depends on how likely someone will actually want to use
> those compilers to build the next version of GNU "make".
judging by comments I've seen in other mailing lists, it's not likely
that GNU "make" will be worth bothering with, since it's been subjected
to incremental incompatibities.
> In that light I don't think my comments were misleading. However, if
> you know of any C compilers that are plausible targets for the next
> version of GNU make, and which don't support #elif and/or require "#"
> to be in column 1, I'd like to hear about them.
--
Thomas E. Dickey <address@hidden>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net