Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: How to find the problem in the object file Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 13:07:55 -0800 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: <23ab01a2-5220-42cb-80b2-20a2b4a35d5c@googlegroups.com> <2beebc58-3f8f-46c6-bd10-e2ec3cf87906@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="4389ae8ca80d0229613347d13905988d"; logging-data="27355"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/h6XJjkmIJKGy8IQ0Qeweq" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:QrED5QXNpTq9mKNUl2fpMED7+u0= sha1:xzi3rQOj56ThQrC6DzeFZ+Yq86c= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:104038 Ian Collins writes: [...] > My view is they should go the route of gets. There would be nothing to > prevent compilers supporting them as an option (the notorious gcc/clang > option "no-strict-aliasing" is a common example), just not in conforming > mode. That would probably cover Tim's use case for development builds > while keeping the risk out of production code. Indeed, if non-prototype function declarations and definitions were removed from the language in a future standard, it is almost certain that most or all C compilers would continue to support them in some non-conforming mode, perhaps even by default. gcc and clang already have "--std=cNN", for NN = 89/90, 99, and 11, which will certainly[*] continue to support old-style function declarations and definitions. [*] Of course I can't be 100% certain of that, but I'd be astonished if it weren't the case. I can imagine gcc and clang eventually dropping support for old C standards, but I expect C11 support to continue for decades. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc. "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this." -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"