Albert Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Substitute the code in the c99.c file with any > other C99 idiom and the results should be the same.
That hasn't been my experience. For example, many C89 compilers support "long long" in some form, even though it's a C99 idiom. Similarly for compound literals, inline, restrict, _Bool, non-constant initializers for auto aggregates, etc. The Autoconf Way is to test for each new-to-C99 feature separately, and coreutils already does this to some extent. For example, it checks for 'inline', 'restrict', _Bool, and 'long long' separately. No doubt more checks could be added. The big difference here is that the above-mentioned features, like the struct hack, are relatively easy to configure using C macros, in a useful way. Statements-before-declarations is not. That is why the statements-before-declarations requirement of some coreutils files is a special issue. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
