On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 12:06:33 +0100 Reimar Döffinger <reimar.doeffin...@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 24.01.2015, at 21:09, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 18:37:01 +0000 > > Derek Buitenhuis <derek.buitenh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 1/24/2015 4:33 PM, wm4 wrote: > >>> Which ones? We even expect C99 support from the compiler. > >> > >> Doesn't matter. It's the project's policy to have decls at > >> block beginnings. Yes some of us think it's better. > >> > >> We know you don't. Don't start an ideological troll war. > > > > Having dumb policies is fine, but then don't use broken compilers as > > excuse. Just say it's your policy to do it this way, even if there's no > > technical necessity. > > Maybe not really relevant, but since I wrote it... Skip it unless you have > time to waste ;) > I guess it's an old habit from when we still used to support gcc 2.95 :) > Which btw last I tried some months ago still worked except for very few cases. > Thing is, we require not that much of C99 and most is header or > preprocessor-related or used very, very rarely. Well, it was enough that someone wrote a c99-to-c89 converter (using clang), which was the only way to compile ffmpeg on C89-only MSVC. (Newer MSVC versions support C99 or parts of it, so this is not a problem anymore.) > And while I don't know where they come from, every now and then I hear about > someone asking for C89 support for some product (possibly custom in-house > compilers for strange architectures/OS? Symbian maybe still hiding in some > hole?). > But with even tinycc supporting it I guess it's reasonable to say that any > "technical" reasons that might exist are more related to someone's laziness > than a real technical reason. > That said, I still prefer it even though I write C++ every day. Maybe it's > just an old habit and secretly longing back to writing PASCAL as in my > childhood days ;) PASCAL at least has reasonable syntax for it. Anyway, I didn't mean to start a flamewar, but if it's the project's policy, then just say it, instead of using inadequate excuses like compilers that someone dug out from an archeological site from before the Neolithic. Because people will look at the technical because and realize it doesn't make much sense. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
