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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #66500

Re: C89 compatibility question

From Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: C89 compatibility question
Date 2015-07-28 10:36 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <ln8ua0nq0q.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink)
References <mp5agt$sos$1@dont-email.me> <lnoaixo2mt.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <mp6a53$avc$1@dont-email.me> <lnk2tlnq33.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <mp7vue$h2b$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

"Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:
> "Keith Thompson" <kst-u@mib.org> wrote in message 
> news:lnk2tlnq33.fsf@kst-u.example.com...
>> "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:
>>>     In my own gcc I have noticed I do not have the ISO header, float.h, 
>>> or
>>> stdbool.h. There may be more lacking so my compiler is not fully ansi or 
>>> iso
>>> compliant.
>>
>> How do you know they're missing?  The only way you can be sure they're
>> missing is by compiling a program that uses them.  Don't assume that the
>> files live in any specific location.
>>
>> In particular, if "/usr/include/stdbool.h" doesn't exist, that doesn't
>> mean there's a problem.
>
>     OK. Well I looked there. I didn't see them. It didn't occur to me they 
> might be somewhere else. I've never tried to use float.h really either.

The point is that the *compiler* knows where to find them.  If you try
to compile something with

    #include <stdbool.h>
    #include <float.h>

and the compiler complains that it can't find a header, then you've got
a problem.  Otherwise, there isn't.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
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"

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

Thread

C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 09:10 -0400
  Re: C89 compatibility question Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-07-27 17:50 +0200
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 12:25 -0400
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:36 -0400
  Re: C89 compatibility question Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2015-07-27 19:54 +0200
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:23 -0400
      Re: C89 compatibility question Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-07-27 17:24 -0700
        Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 13:57 -0400
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:27 -0400
  Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 11:51 -0700
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:53 -0400
    Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 18:10 -0400
      Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 16:22 -0700
        Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 09:28 -0400
          Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-28 10:36 -0700

csiph-web