> From: Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 16:59:10 -0500 (EST) > > I've been thinking lately about the issues surrounding this macro (see > archives and TODO list). Is there any reason why AC_PROG_CC_STDC could > not simply be folded into AC_PROG_CC? Is there any software that must > avoid an ANSI C compiler at all cost?
Not these days. In the past I recall some problems with that macro, as it set options that caused some compilers to become pedantic (e.g., to refuse to define `fileno' in <stdio.h>, since the C standard does not allow that). However, I think those problems are ironed out now. I think in practice the main use of that macro nowadays is to define PROTOTYPES for old code that still tries to be portable to K&R C. A reasonable amount of GNU code still tries to be portable to K&R C. GNU Emacs comes to mind. However, hardly anybody actually uses K&R C compilers anymore, except perhaps the GCC folks while bootstrapping. So the K&R mode doesn't get tested much these days.
