On 2012-04-29 09:56:03 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 04/29/2012 08:34 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > >I don't like the fact that you assume by default that compilers > >are non-conforming > > Nor do I. How about the following improvement to the heuristic? > It is just a heuristic so we can't do a perfect job, but the > following should be better than what we have now: [...]
Yes, this is better, IMHO. The main problem is that partial C11 implementations that support _Noreturn but not other mandatory C11 features may not have __STDC_VERSION__ defined to 201112. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
