On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Oliver Stöneberg wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Gerrit E.G. Hobbelt wrote:
> > 
> > > Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > > > I think this (and many of the patches you sent) it is just *your* 
> > > > problems 
> > > > with a broken compiler. The Standard define non-local non-initialized 
> > > > object to be pre-initialized with zero.
> > > > Please do not post those kind of patches anymore.
> > > >   
> > > MSVC2005 is indeed not 100% C99 compliant. It's still living with one 
> > > leg in the C89 era: I'll have to live with that.
> > 
> > Hmmm, I made quite a few XMail releases (and built a lot more at work) 
> > with MSVC2005, with zero problems. I don't think Microsoft can screw up 
> > the standard *that* bad. It must be something else.
> > 
> I was looking up the option of GCC, that sets the standard, just 
> today and according to the GCC manuals it using GNU89 as default:
> 
> `gnu89'
>     Default, ISO C90 plus GNU extensions (including some C99 
> features). 
> 
> Unfortunately it's not documented, what those C99 featues are.

That has been true by forever basically. Every C compiler I used, and I 
used many of them, did it.



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to