Re: [openssl-project] Minimum C version

2018-10-07 Thread Tim Hudson
I don't see a *substantial benefit* from going to C99 and I've worked on
numerous embedded platforms where it is highly unlikely that C99 support
will ever be available.

Kurt - do you have a specific list of features you think would be
beneficial - or is it just a general sense to move forward?

We should ensure that C++ builds work - but that is mostly simply keyword
avoidance - but sticking with the base C89/C90 in my experience is still a
reasonable position.

For Microsoft reading
https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/fa17bcdd-7165-4645-a676-ef3797b95918/details-on-c99-support-in-msvc?forum=vcgeneral
and
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2013/07/19/c99-library-support-in-visual-studio-2013/
may
assist.

I know there are Microsoft platforms that require use of earlier compilers
than VS2013 to support (unfortunately).

Tim.


On Sun, Oct 7, 2018 at 11:33 PM Kurt Roeckx  wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 02:01:36PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Unfortunately Microsoft still does not support C99, I believe. Or did
> that get fixed eventually, in a version that can reasonably be required?
>
> That is a very good point, and they never intend to fix that.
>
> So would that mean we say that VC will be unsupported? Or that we
> should make it so that it can be build using C++?
>
>
> Kurt
>
> ___
> openssl-project mailing list
> openssl-project@openssl.org
> https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project
>
___
openssl-project mailing list
openssl-project@openssl.org
https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project

Re: [openssl-project] Minimum C version

2018-10-07 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 02:01:36PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Unfortunately Microsoft still does not support C99, I believe. Or did that 
> get fixed eventually, in a version that can reasonably be required?

That is a very good point, and they never intend to fix that.

So would that mean we say that VC will be unsupported? Or that we
should make it so that it can be build using C++?


Kurt

___
openssl-project mailing list
openssl-project@openssl.org
https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project


Re: [openssl-project] Minimum C version

2018-10-07 Thread Richard Levitte
In message <20181007124854.ga3...@roeckx.be> on Sun, 7 Oct 2018 14:48:55 +0200, 
Kurt Roeckx  said:

> We're currently still targetting C89/C90 + long long, yet use
> various features of C99 and even some C11 when it's available.
> 
> C99 is now almost 20 years old, can we please move to at least
> that?

I'd like that.  I've just had a look at the compilers I worry about,
and I see no reason any more to stick with C89/C90.

Cheers,
Richard

-- 
Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
___
openssl-project mailing list
openssl-project@openssl.org
https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project


[openssl-project] Minimum C version

2018-10-07 Thread Kurt Roeckx
Hi,

We're currently still targetting C89/C90 + long long, yet use
various features of C99 and even some C11 when it's available.

C99 is now almost 20 years old, can we please move to at least
that?


Kurt

___
openssl-project mailing list
openssl-project@openssl.org
https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-project