Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: switch/extension for see below strongly needed Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 00:04:51 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 25 Message-ID: <868q9ahai4.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <10uapjs$19723$1@dont-email.me> <10uhp7t$39olh$1@dont-email.me> <10ui38p$3d4gs$1@dont-email.me> <10ui48o$3d4jn$2@dont-email.me> <10ui7n3$3eguh$1@dont-email.me> <10uifdl$3gs6h$1@dont-email.me> <10uijv9$3i6dl$1@dont-email.me> <10ujm3r$3pnbb$1@dont-email.me> <10ukcf2$dis$1@dont-email.me> <10ukg34$rn3$1@dont-email.me> <10ukknp$2umi$1@dont-email.me> <10uksag$63on$1@dont-email.me> <10ul4ml$96it$1@dont-email.me> <10um9mn$hnok$2@dont-email.me> <10umrua$nckr$1@dont-email.me> <10un059$k0ug$10@dont-email.me> <10ungrs$tkfa$2@dont-email.me> <10unhp5$k0ug$11@dont-email.me> <10untjj$11epj$2@kst.eternal-september.org> <86pl2mhhaf.fsf@linuxsc.com> <10urgp3$228p5$1@kst.eternal-september.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 07:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; logging-data="2192210"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19VlGDJK7Gk75m/3uf9wFkkMwzGRSqCx00="; posting-host="bfea1ad8920711d5190b1ffe56c7d4f2" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:D8JYnWMfLh/OPHJeqk0c9tH8bCk= sha1:MajOK5Nj0OEUOlb4GqlWZT0KX1k= sha256:8L5FP7Z2qaV9srmxAwzOwVf5CeRwnqz3aWM4eJjOnO4= sha1:3i7TgoNUlzHICckNtByTMqqLb0o= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:399344 Keith Thompson writes: > Tim Rentsch writes: > >> Keith Thompson writes: >> >>> gcc by default compiles GNU C, not ISO C. It also fails to emit >>> many language-required diagnostics. GNU C is ISO C with gcc >>> extensions. Prior to C23, allowing "L:}" is a documented gcc >>> extension. >> >> I seem to remember that sometime in the past gcc behaved in this >> way. And I see that current documentation on the gcc website says >> something to that effect. Trying it just now, however, I couldn't >> get gcc to accept "L:}" under any circumstances, no matter which >> combination of options was used. The unavailability doesn't bother >> me; I just thought the observation was interesting and worth >> reporting. > > Apparently this extension was introduced in gcc 11, released in 2021. > It also allows labels on declarations. That's good to know, but it doesn't help my (probably incorrect) memory telling me I observed it working sometime in the distant past. In any case thank you for the reportage.