From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17599 invoked by alias); 28 May 2012 20:44:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 17590 invoked by uid 22791); 28 May 2012 20:44:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:43:55 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4SKhmIS021700; Mon, 28 May 2012 22:43:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.5/8.14.3/Submit) id q4SKhksB010254; Mon, 28 May 2012 22:43:46 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 20:44:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201205282043.q4SKhksB010254@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: tromey@redhat.com CC: dje@google.com, pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <87bold8l4d.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (message from Tom Tromey on Thu, 24 May 2012 12:55:14 -0600) Subject: Re: New ARI warning Wed May 23 01:55:03 UTC 2012 References: <20120523015503.GA25312@sourceware.org> <4fbc9d77.0853b40a.641e.ffff90dbSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> <87bold8l4d.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg01001.txt.bz2 > From: Tom Tromey > > >>>>> "Doug" == Doug Evans writes: > > Doug> We've been debating whether to move to C++, and yet we can't even move > Doug> to C99. :-( > > In this particular case I think I somewhat prefer the sized types. > > That said, I wouldn't mind moving to C99. Of course, it is easy for me > to say; the important question is whether anybody is building on hosts > that don't have C99 compilers. OpenBSD/vax, OpenBSD/m68k and OpenBSD/m88k are still stuck with GCC 2.95, which is almost, but not quite C99. However, it's been ages since I've last built GDB on any of those platforms. So it's probably time to stop caring about those platforms. I fear that GDB has become too bloated to be able to build it a typical machine that runs these specific OpenBSD versions. But even GCC 2.95 supports long long as an extension to C90. So I'd have no objection to requiring C99, except for one style-related issue. I really, really hate mixing declarations with code (something that C99 started to allow). So if we switch to requiring C99, I think we should add a rule to the coding standards that variables may only be declared at the start of a block.