On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Emil Velikov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12/08/14 17:30, Ilia Mirkin wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Emil Velikov <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> I'm not entirely sure how piglit build with gcc as is, yet VC compiler >>> seems very unhappy about this. >> >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf >> >> See 7.9 Alternate spellings <iso646.h>. I guess that gets included by >> gcc somehow. >> > Thank Ilia, we live and we learn :) > > The heading states "Committee Draft — May 6, 2005", so I take that the final > document has (almost) zero changes comparing to this draft ? Or perhaps there > is no official version ?
No, I'm just lazy and pick the first link a search engine finds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_alternative_tokens This thing is quite old -- 1995 amendment to C90. _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
