On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 21:49 +0000, Mcdaniel, Daryl wrote: > The EDK II code base does not support C99 for non-platform-specific > code, only C95 is supported. > This is because we must support a compiler which is only C89 (Strict > mode) or C95 with extensions.
I'm a little confused by this. Why "must" we support such an ancient compiler? Why can't we have a whip-round and buy them a licence for GCC or CLANG, for crying out loud? Why would someone be stuck on such a compiler, and yet *still* be updating to newer EDK2 code? That seems rather schizophrenic. It looks like we're missing appropriate -std= arguments for GCC, if we really do want to be stuck on a language which is 20 years old. And as we progress further into the 21st century, I expect support for ancient obsolete versions of the C standard will become less and less reliable. You'll end up with breakage on *modern* compilers, just to support the Luddites. Is that really a path we want to go down? -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
