On 08/23/10 09:14, Eric Blake wrote: > So does clang define __GNUC__? That's a lie, if it does not support the > same extensions as gcc.
Yes, and this lie causes a lot of problems in practice: clang does not support many extensions that GCC does support. The usual workaround is to replace "defined __GNUC__" with "defined __GNUC__ && ! defined __clang__", but this sort of thing is obviously not The Autoconf Way. It is better, in general, to avoid the use of __GNUC__ entirely. In this particular case, where the __GNUC__ is gratuitous, I'd remove the __GNUC__ (while also replacing the -1 with 0 as Eric suggests).
