Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93909 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5548 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2016 09:08:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Jun 2016 09:08:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@fleshgrinder.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@fleshgrinder.com; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fleshgrinder.com from 212.232.25.164 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@fleshgrinder.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.232.25.164 mx208.easyname.com Received: from [212.232.25.164] ([212.232.25.164:57119] helo=mx208.easyname.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 66/10-03917-2962D575 for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 05:08:35 -0400 Received: from cable-81-173-133-15.netcologne.de ([81.173.133.15] helo=[192.168.178.20]) by mx.easyname.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bC1NS-0000Vl-Ea for internals@lists.php.net; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 09:08:18 +0000 Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net To: php-internals Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 11:08:23 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="j8oIaTjCORJWEw2TEFEeguqhHH5jfTMPx" X-ACL-Warn: X-DNSBL-BARRACUDACENTRAL Subject: C89 vs. C99 From: php@fleshgrinder.com (Fleshgrinder) --j8oIaTjCORJWEw2TEFEeguqhHH5jfTMPx Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="pXeKm4u1raQb5aWsFDloe39nWRfSSIhr8" From: Fleshgrinder Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net To: php-internals Message-ID: Subject: C89 vs. C99 --pXeKm4u1raQb5aWsFDloe39nWRfSSIhr8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am curious why we are not finally doing the switch to C99 with VC14 finally supporting most of C99. I mean, I know that GCC and VC14 do no fully support C99 but the most common features are implemented: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C99#Implementations - https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html --=20 Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger --pXeKm4u1raQb5aWsFDloe39nWRfSSIhr8-- --j8oIaTjCORJWEw2TEFEeguqhHH5jfTMPx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXXSaLAAoJEOKkKcqFPVVrAsYQAJlWkvxalYMxtFRtKOfb9Rgq eOg9mHF7a+6Du98IJefPxrLGiedaPLTXjRbcndJZKrdTucF6MNO5jDmi2S4TXNnP HJ72YfRCVnoxILqTwvE1bllz1sqgB76WJG69k05pL1/IsKAFhtwZPL7PO9Zs/j4r 1m/z2grZanwaDico1LgL7a3GdUFmZwNGKgPnh3HbnBvdyjOnkkPa+yPzHHMCXiBd 0Zj65DrlowQeoUV8/f5LhkOiEf67UNSfcWsoeC7EHT/wyE2auXYA26W1FmyoCCSY xDEwvP+R8UJIgtKn3tz/8pURfKdx9ZPpeR8WQQ0VZqYVKBf/K0qGK87RmuTfLGUT OqVkC7+NRnEm1EZFyuO6nCiU16QAxGGkUmAnWt4hHVJvoPG8/7O9cBU8ZYIckNMA iIQdLtQmf74x06+eUInGGEHJyNtW7N4JeoEFy0/TQdg1DkOCnwRR/KdlAuQcgr/B +PZ+wzpu5fgxbrmsHBTCA+HxFfEGbZZ2aeT4zSjJVtwDKQB3CuGR4eau+z8wr0Tm mluZdP5OcUfEdAP6qTwEWsS8WeFLv+/Kfqfg5sfY0O7WWAwR9qfVhXppq8OS+/Wq vUcNQ8/1jHZ1JAJTL+x0+7CPTwv9oBa3eJ26wISCBli6TrH1aHIXRPFUpN0aJARR P5Vcj3sT1yfkCeXwJxs8 =nI4H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --j8oIaTjCORJWEw2TEFEeguqhHH5jfTMPx--