On 2024-11-21 17:13:56 +0100, grischka via Tinycc-devel wrote: > On 11/21/24 14:39, Domingo Alvarez Duarte wrote: > > Thanks fo reply ! > > > > Again even if it's valid C code it's clear that it has several drawbacks > > pointed so far by other comments on this thread and if there is a more > > clean/clear/elegant way to express it why not talk/try it out ? > > For sure the drawback is that it will stop to work when tcc reaches > 0.9.100 say in the year 2240 (given a release cycle of 3 years on > average ;)
OK, so you plan to stick to 0.9.x for ever? FYI, the issue was more the change of one of the first two numbers (in which case, x would probably go back to a single digit, which does not work either). -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
