[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bool and C23
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: bool and C23 |
Date: |
Sat, 10 Sep 2022 15:10:14 +0200 |
On Samstag, 10. September 2022 06:43:06 CEST Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 9/9/22 04:14, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > I would suggest to keep*one* module, and keep it named 'stdbool'.
> > Its meaning will be "provide bool, true, false according to the
> > standards".
> > It can invoke AC_HEADER_STDBOOL and AC_C_BOOL under the hood.
> > The important point is that the migration from older to newer ISO
> > standard
> > versions is transparent (not troublesome) for the Gnulib user.
>
> OK, attached is a revised Gnulib proposed patchset that does that. It
> changes stdbool to assume C99 (since that should be safe now), which
> means stdbool no longer needs to use AC_HEADER_STDBOOL. It moves the old
> stdbool stuff into a new module 'stdbool-c99' that's already marked
> obsolescent, in case someone still needs to port to pre-C99 compilers
> for some reason.
The documentation has a mistake:
$ make gnulib.html
date -u -r gnulib-readme.texi +"@set UPDATED %F %T" > updated-stamp
env LANG= LC_MESSAGES= LC_ALL= LANGUAGE= makeinfo --no-split
--reference-limit=2000 --html -o gnulib.html gnulib.texi
gnulib-readme.texi:370: @xref reference to nonexistent node `c-bool'
make: *** [Makefile:24: gnulib.html] Error 1
Fix: s/c-bool/stdbool.h/g
Bruno