Re: dfa.c fix for C89 compilers

[Reuben Thomas]

On 31 March 2010 18:04, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 05:19 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>>
>> The point about C89's age is
>> irrelevant; what is important is how well and widely C99 is
>> implemented, which, to put it mildly, depends on your perspective.
>> (Even GCC doesn't fully implement it, though thankfully the holes are
>> now pretty small and esoteric.) Making a program require C99,
>> therefore, relegates it to mainstream, modern systems.
>
> For this particular feature, the "flag date" is June 18, 2001 (when GCC 3.0
> was released).  It's still almost 9 years old.
>
> Are there any serious porting targets that do not support GCC 3.0?

Nelson Beebe seems to think so: his builds of GNU Zile for me included
many platform/compiler combinations that only supported C89. I
certainly haven't used a system that is a "serious porting target"
that doesn't support GCC 3.0 for many years, but my experience is
limited.

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org