On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 01:32:29 +0100 Vincent Lefevre <vincent+...@vinc17.org> wrote:
> On 2012-01-20 23:28:07 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > May I politely suggest that this is the wrong place to complain about > > other compilers pretending to be GCC :) > > I think that's the fault of GCC, which should have defined a macro > for each extension. I agree with that. And I even hope that if GCC 4.7 defined several macros, one for each extensions, like e.g. __GCC_HAVE_INDIRECT_GOTO__ for the goto *x; feature __GCC_HAVE_STATEMENT_EXPR__ for statement expressions etc then perhaps in several years other compilers would do likewise. We just have to document our features and their corresponding macros... Regards. -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mine, sont seulement les miennes} ***