On Jun 13, Daniel Jacobowitz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 06:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 18:20:37 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > said: > > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 08:40:47PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > >> On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:22:17 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > >> > > >> >> You need to read up on your standards. The language called C is > > >> >> defined by only one authoritative standard. > > >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> >> ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E) (C)ISO/IEC > > >> >> > > >> >> Contents ix > > >> >> > > >> >> 5 This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition, > > >> >> ISO/IEC 9899:1990, as amended and corrected by ISO/IEC > > >> >> 9899/COR1:1994, ISO/IEC 9899/AMD1:1995, and ISO /IEC > > >> >> 9899/COR2:1996. > > >> >> > > >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> >> > > >> >> Thus, I need have no such qualifiers when talking abouit > > >> >> conforming C implmentations. > > >> > > >> > Given the real-world deployment of probably at least a dozen > > >> > major OSs which were 9899:1990 conformant and predate the > > >> > 9899:1999 standard, I'd say that's a pretty useless point of > > >> > view. > > >> > > >> OOh, I am blinded by the cogency of your arguments. > > >> > > >> C99 is over 3 years old. > > > > > And still not fully implemented. Unstable only switched to a > > > compiler with minimal C99 support some months ago. GCC has no > > > roadmap for implementing the remaining C99 features so it may be > > > years before they are available on free operating systems. > > > > And? You seem to be implying (incorrectly), that flex requires > > more of C99 than is already present in Debian and a post 2.95 > > gcc. The new flex has been compiled, and has all the test suites > > succesfully compile, on all 11 architectures Debian supports. > > > > >> For ancient platforms, use flex-old. > > >> > > >> Anyway, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and you can do > > >> whatever you want with your packages and your code. > > > > > I am somewhat distressed that the version of flex provided with > > > Debian (I am assuming from the discussion) will not be usable for > > > cross-platform development without constant care to use flex-old > > > instead. We've finally persuaded binutils and GCC to move into the > > > era of C90 source. I don't think we'll see C99 widely enough > > > supported to write portable software using it until 2008 at least. > > > > Again you raise a strawman. Flex comes with a plethora of > > tests, and all the tests have always been passed. Flex works with all > > 11 architectures that comprise debian (we have a mysterious test > > failure on the most recent m68k run, though I think it may have more > > to do with the new gcc there than anything else). > > > > Now, if you have any concrete objections as to why flex does > > not work in Debian, please feeel free to point them out. If you > > merely want to grumble about how flex may not work until 2008, > > without providing a basis for such grumplings, I am sure I can't help > > you there. > > You have missed my point. I am quite aware that flex-generated lexers > will continue to work on all Debian platforms. But until C99 is much > more mature than it is today, many other significant platforms will not > have a C99-compatible compiler - even to the degree of including > <stdint.h>. Therefore Debian becomes more awkward for cross-platform, > portable development. Not useless, because of flex-old, but certainly > more awkward; I will not be able to build Debian packages which require > a recent flex in the same root in which I build cross-platform > software. > > Certainly you have not broken Debian; but I maintain that this > short-sightedness does damage Debian's usefulness as a development > platform, for all those targets which many more practical developers > must support in order to do their jobs.
I think this is an excellent point. I can think of many times when I've done development work in Debian and ported the result to Solaris, IRIX or HPUX. It is, of course, not a requirement for Debian that this be easy, but the easier it is, the more convincing the argument for integrating Debian into a mixed *nix environment, for everyone from developers to CIOs. -- Neil Roeth