On 02.05.2012 15:37, Matt Joiner wrote:
On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
mailto:solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org mailto:la...@hastings.org wrote:
I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A
I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even that
compiler added this extension in the early 90s.
No, it didn't. The MSVC version that we currently use (VS 2008) still
doesn't support it.
Regards,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
Do we officially support any C compilers that *don't* permit intermingled
variable declarations and code? Do we *unofficially* support any? And if
we do, what do we gain?
This might be of interest:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman dirk...@ochtman.nl wrote:
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
Do we officially support any C compilers that *don't* permit intermingled
variable declarations and code? Do we *unofficially* support any? And
I don't have the time to figure it out right now, but I'll look more
into it later.
I recently did an analysis here:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-January/115375.html
The motivation for C++ compilation is gone meanwhile, as VS now supports
C in WinRT apps quite well.
Right now the CPython trunk religiously declares all variables at the
tops of scopes, before any code, because this is all C89 permits. Back
in the 90s all the C compilers took a page out of the C++ playbook and
independently, but nearly without exception, extended the language to
allow
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even that
compiler added this extension in the early 90s.
Do we officially
On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even that
Matt Joiner, 02.05.2012 15:37:
On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its name
rhymes with Bike Row Soft Frizz You All See Muss Muss.) But even
On Wed, 02 May 2012 21:37:35 +0800, Matt Joiner anacro...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 2, 2012 6:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:43:32 -0700
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
I realize we can't jump to C99 because of A Certain Compiler. (Its
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
I'm not sure if MSVC and MSVC++ are the same thing, but I surely remember
reports by MSVC users only a few years ago that Cython generated C code
contained a declaration after an executed code at some point, and that
11 matches
Mail list logo
