Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:97162 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 28767 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2016 14:49:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Nov 2016 14:49:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dclarke@blastwave.org; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dclarke@blastwave.org; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain blastwave.org from 209.17.115.117 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dclarke@blastwave.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.17.115.117 atl4mhob23.registeredsite.com Received: from [209.17.115.117] ([209.17.115.117:53164] helo=atl4mhob23.registeredsite.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 67/16-21589-01EF6385 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:49:52 -0500 Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.77.36]) by atl4mhob23.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uAOEnmiw061957 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:49:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 2879 invoked by uid 0); 24 Nov 2016 14:49:48 -0000 X-TCPREMOTEIP: 99.253.103.29 X-Authenticated-UID: dclarke@blastwave.org Received: from unknown (HELO ?172.16.35.41?) (dclarke@blastwave.org@99.253.103.29) by 0 with ESMTPA; 24 Nov 2016 14:49:48 -0000 To: Anatol Belski , internals@lists.php.net References: <06fe01d24646$00d96d30$028c4790$@php.net> <323632ff-5d0d-418d-4c15-2a57e70a7f75@blastwave.org> <073501d2465f$b3ff82f0$1bfe88d0$@belski.net> Message-ID: <919269a4-629a-ccdf-e93d-8aa3a4a61836@blastwave.org> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 09:49:48 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <073501d2465f$b3ff82f0$1bfe88d0$@belski.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 7.0.14RC1 is available for testing From: dclarke@blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke) >> > You can just enable -std=c99 with gcc I won't be using gcc for this test. > to see it doesn't compile. Some amount of work might be needed for > true C99 compat. Oh, I agree. That is fine at this stage. I was merely doing the acid test to see what happened. > I'd suggest you to reply to the earlier thread "C89 vs. C99" started recently. I saw and I did. However at the moment I am looking firmly at 7.0.14RC1 just to see if I can get a compile at all using whatever tools necessary on a somewhat strict environment. I start with c99 and then move downwards until I hit a very lax compiler with extensions and gnuisms etc etc. Near as I can tell by the gcc manuals and specs there isn't full compliance for C99 in gcc at this time regardless so I will start with a compiler that has worked very well for me on this POSIX tight platform. Works well for version 5.6.x thus far with the exception of the last two releases. Dennis