Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > AFAIK there is no reason for a cc *script*
Good point!
> As for c89/c99, +1 on the script idea; separate versions are definitely
> not necessary. Are there supposed to be similar names for the ISO C++
> standards (c++98 and c++0x)?
Would be trivial to add on top :)
cheers,
DaveK
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
