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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #9230

Re: lcc-win

From Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: lcc-win
Date 2011-08-11 13:43 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <ln1uwr8yr5.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> (permalink)
References <j20kj4$efl$1@speranza.aioe.org> <5b596b68-1a29-4ff3-94f5-54c10d8b1c18@hl8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <j214f8$mme$1@speranza.aioe.org> <Xns9F3EE1E888995dammel@y2plugh.fqdn.th-h.de>

Show all headers | View raw

Ralf Damaschke <rwspam@gmx.de> writes:
> jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> wrote:
>> None of my extensions affects strictly conforming programs. I have
>> never added ANY keyword, nor a reserved identifier.
>> 
>> I have repeated this countless times since several YEARS but you
>> (and your friends) ALWAYS bring up the same WRONG argument.
>
> May be because even an eternal repetition of your argument does not
> make it true. I remember to have seen here reports that lcc-win
> deliberately copies declarations of standard functions to standard
> headers they do not belong to, and pollutes the user name space
> with proprietary macro and function names. All of these "extensions"
> will prevent a specific strictly conforming program from being
> compiled.

My understand is that lcc-win's "-ansic" command-line option is
intended to cause it to conform to C99, which includes issuing
diagnostics for any incompatible extensions.  Most C compilers are
non-conforming in their default mode.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

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

Thread

lcc-win jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-11 15:14 +0200
  Re: lcc-win tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-08-11 07:51 -0700
    Re: lcc-win James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-11 11:23 -0400
      Re: lcc-win tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-08-11 08:35 -0700
        Re: lcc-win James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-11 12:28 -0400
          Re: lcc-win Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-11 11:46 -0700
            Re: lcc-win tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-08-12 10:20 -0700
              Re: lcc-win James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 14:00 -0400
                Re: lcc-win tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-08-12 11:23 -0700
                Re: lcc-win blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-08-12 11:36 -0700
                Re: lcc-win tom st denis <tom@iahu.ca> - 2011-08-12 11:42 -0700
                Re: lcc-win Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-08-12 11:52 -0700
                Re: lcc-win jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-12 20:37 +0200
    Re: lcc-win jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-11 19:45 +0200
      Re: lcc-win Ralf Damaschke <rwspam@gmx.de> - 2011-08-11 20:12 +0000
        Re: lcc-win jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-11 22:43 +0200
        Re: lcc-win Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-11 13:43 -0700
        Re: lcc-win Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-12 08:50 +1200
    Re: lcc-win gordonb.04sy5@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-08-12 19:54 -0500

csiph-web