Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 11:35:05 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <9628-Sat26Apr2003113504+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <3EA9EBED.E8ADB007@yahoo.com> (message from CBFalconer on Fri, 25
	Apr 2003 22:16:13 -0400)
Subject: Re: nmalloc revisited
References: <10304252113 DOT AA21892 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <3EA9EBED DOT E8ADB007 AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 22:16:13 -0400
> From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
> 
> And that is the point.  -ansi -pedantic HAS to exclude it. 
> Otherwise the system is non-compliant.

We already have the machinery in the headers to deal with that.  See
those "#ifndef __STRICT_ANSI__" and "#ifndef _POSIX_SOURCE" thingies
that signal non-ANSI and non-Posix parts?  GCC defines __STRICT_ANSI__
when given the -ansi -predantic switches, so it never sees those parts
in that case.

Therefore, there's no need to worry about this.