On 3/26/23 7:53 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 2023-03-24 12:04, Chet Ramey wrote:
However, Bash's devel branch still has old-style function definitions
and therefore won't compile with a strict C23 compiler. For example,
get_variable_value in variables.c is old-style. I assume there would be
On 2023-03-24 12:04, Chet Ramey wrote:
However, Bash's devel branch still has old-style function definitions
and therefore won't compile with a strict C23 compiler. For example,
get_variable_value in variables.c is old-style. I assume there would
be interest in fixing remaining areas where
Chet Ramey writes:
> On 3/24/23 1:23 AM, Sam James wrote:
>
>> I hope so. I'm waiting for a review of an issue in one of its configure
>> checks with a strict compiler too [0].
>> [0]
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2023-02/msg0.html
>
> Sorry, I missed that one.
No worries
On 3/23/23 9:49 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
However, Bash's devel branch still has old-style function definitions and
therefore won't compile with a strict C23 compiler. For example,
get_variable_value in variables.c is old-style. I assume there would be
interest in fixing remaining areas where
On 3/24/23 1:36 AM, Oğuz İsmail Uysal wrote:
On 3/24/23 4:49 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
a strict C23 compiler
Does such a compiler exist? Is C23 even published yet?
It's not, but the latest drafts are pretty much final, especially with
respect to new features and behavior changes.
--
``The lyf
On 3/24/23 1:23 AM, Sam James wrote:
I hope so. I'm waiting for a review of an issue in one of its configure
checks with a strict compiler too [0].
[0] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2023-02/msg0.html
Sorry, I missed that one.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to
Paul Eggert writes:
> On 3/23/23 18:23, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023, at 9:16 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>>> I see that Bash won't compile with a C23 compiler, since it still uses
>>> old-style function definitions which C23 no longer supports. Is there
>>> any effort and/or
On 3/24/23 4:49 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
a strict C23 compiler
Does such a compiler exist? Is C23 even published yet?
On 3/23/23 18:23, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023, at 9:16 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
I see that Bash won't compile with a C23 compiler, since it still uses
old-style function definitions which C23 no longer supports. Is there
any effort and/or interest in fixing this portability
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023, at 9:16 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I see that Bash won't compile with a C23 compiler, since it still uses
> old-style function definitions which C23 no longer supports. Is there
> any effort and/or interest in fixing this portability problem in Bash?
I believe this was done
I see that Bash won't compile with a C23 compiler, since it still uses
old-style function definitions which C23 no longer supports. Is there
any effort and/or interest in fixing this portability problem in Bash?
It's OK these days to assume C89 or later, so it's OK for Bash to switch
to
11 matches
Mail list logo
