------- Comment #4 from giles at xiph dot org 2005-12-20 18:46 ------- I think you misunderstood. This is not about rejecting C99 code, this about warning about portability. I understand it is a C99 feature as well as an long-standing gnu extension, and -pedantic doesn't reject the program, it just prints a warning.
If the correct was to generate warnings for source that isn't compliant to the selected standard (and the documentation says -ansi is the same as -std=c89) is to include -pedantic then the documentation should say so. If, as the name suggests, -pedantic is for issues that aren't likely to trouble one in practice, then either '-ansi -Wall' or vanilla '-ansi' should warn about this C99 feature precisely because it is not portable to another major compiler in common use. This would provides helpful assistance to programmers and reduce the number of portability bugs people must file, track down, and fix. If one were happy with the portability of the default gnu89 or gnu99 C, one wouldn't be adding -ansi to the commandline. :P -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25504
