Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #16762

Re: Comparing C11 compilers

Show all headers | View raw

Quentin Pope <qp19433@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> writes:

> Which C11 compilers are people here using? Have you had any problems with 
> the new features? Does anyone have information on vendors' plans (esp gcc, 
> Intel)?

Did you see http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.7/changes.html, which lists
changes for the upcoming GCC 4.7 release:

  C

  There is support for some more features from the C11 revision of
  the ISO C standard.  GCC now accepts the options -std=c11 and
  -std=gnu11, in addition to the previous -std=c1x and -std=gnu1x.

    * Unicode strings (previously supported only with options such
      as -std=gnu11, now supported with -std=c11), and the
      predefined macros __STDC_UTF_16__ and __STDC_UTF_32__.

    * Nonreturning functions (_Noreturn and <stdnoreturn.h>).

    * Alignment support (_Alignas, _Alignof, max_align_t,
      <stdalign.h>).

    * A built-in function __builtin_complex is provided to support
      C library implementation of the CMPLX family of macros.
-- 
Ben Pfaff 
http://benpfaff.org

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Comparing C11 compilers Quentin Pope <qp19433@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> - 2012-02-06 17:48 +0000
  Re: Comparing C11 compilers Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-02-06 09:50 -0800
  Re: Comparing C11 compilers bartek szurgot <basz@no.spam> - 2012-02-06 20:29 +0100
    Re: Comparing C11 compilers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-06 11:59 -0800
      Re: Comparing C11 compilers bartek szurgot <basz@no.spam> - 2012-02-08 16:29 +0100
  Re: Comparing C11 compilers Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 21:36 +0000

csiph-web