X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <49C1F434.7050107@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:28:52 +0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: gcc4: cc References: <49C0467A DOT 1080404 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <49C07906 DOT 2060504 AT gmail DOT com> <49C1CA1E DOT 20509 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <49C1CFE7 DOT 1030401 AT sbcglobal DOT net> <49C1E05A DOT 2060206 AT gmail DOT com> <49C1E756 DOT 7000007 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> In-Reply-To: <49C1E756.7000007@users.sourceforge.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > AFAIK there is no reason for a cc *script* Good point! > As for c89/c99, +1 on the script idea; separate versions are definitely > not necessary. Are there supposed to be similar names for the ISO C++ > standards (c++98 and c++0x)? Would be trivial to add on top :) cheers, DaveK -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/