On 4/12/2016 11:24 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> 
> Also, checking for <stdio.h> is pointless these days.  You can portably
> assume a C89 compiler (and these days, often a C99 compiler), which
> guarantees <stdio.h> is present.
> 

But removing that check would thwart the purpose of autoconf being able
to provide legacy support, would it not?  I suppose there comes a point
in time when legacy needs a maximum age but I think that requires some
acknowledgement from the users of autoconf.

-- 
Earnie

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

Reply via email to