On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 04:08:58PM -0700, chromatic wrote: > On Thursday 29 March 2007 15:44, Steve Peters wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:51:54PM -0700, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote: > > > Sweeping dirt under the rug doesn't mean that the house has been cleaned > > up. It means I've turned it into someone else's problem. I'd rather > > Parrot was solid and reliable than something VM users cannot rely on. > > I turned on -ansi -pedantic for a compile last night and had my fill of > errors > about 'long long' not being in C90 and commas at the end of enumerated lists. > > Is there a way to get more meaningful error messages? (I thought we used > C99, for example).
IIRC we're on C89 because it is still the only common standard. In particular, IIRC someone sent a message to this list quoting Microsoft policy that their C compiler was unlikely to gain any more C99 functionality because most people were interested in using C++ IIRC Perl 5 can build with few warnings under -ansi -pedantic because the default configuration doesn't use any of the C (that is C99) type long long. My hunch is that commas at the end of enumerated lists is likely to be something that will hinder portability, whereas the world is resigned to long long. [I say resigned, because "long long" breaches one of the axioms of C89, that "long" is the longest integer type] Nicholas Clark
