On 6/20/06, Max Dyckhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm sorry, I suppose I should have asked "why use c89 at all?" :)
c89 is considerably more portable than c99. Out of popular compilers, only gcc implements c99 (I know only gcc and VC). c99 is still largely ignored by some commercial compiler, notably VC. If you want your C code to be widely portable, you'd avoid c99, for practical reasons.
Did you try the suggestion that I made, or is it not appropriate?
Changing extension to .c89/.c99 is not an option. gcc even does not understand such file extensions, only *.c
If not, how do you, as a human being, identify between the c89 and the c99 source files?
This is per-project. Some projects are c99. Some porjects are c89. File extensions for both are *.c Yakov
