X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=ZKq8Xu8PiQ6gS9tuERTmkbevOF9mk10o2AkiHHz9+Lg=;
        b=yxnbkzpUBlfcfR7lN2sRc+CYL2hJEaQuM/xX127o7n4IanOTl+lfVo592GLJZadgtb
         nyC4W2xCWz7zLClIQ232fTVHSMf1K8KMdV7Aco54bYRdcyrZ0j/Z8hcMFuRSBiWGOpuc
         qV1cS8XywJEuCTE2ek9RCsDlGj9rgjZ+h8QtWgyjtle1sQS86NRNz5i4mfrFzjVoZ7FF
         04ke5oo1VBD6pugmS0pGWtzoatkcJPSOwHDxuuWMUX/LEH7RDel6RMiCsaRMbY4xbh4e
         d2XBCNHztd2onQSrAXmWA45Fn46N8FTDejum9FZeO8FWA+vBYnE40Flj5ufum0G8JdtO
         +oTw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=ZKq8Xu8PiQ6gS9tuERTmkbevOF9mk10o2AkiHHz9+Lg=;
        b=NJTgLlHdr1thRxE0qv1W8B3v112Nlb4TTy8zp5yBhFaLgptm4s7t2BC+V2w8k2yw6t
         kEz15R84jytwCLXoyjhpZipaQAauVzB20ZzIZCKOLSu2lyqqULQTWxr85OoP8TQ2faE0
         3Rg/0Lv48bDhHdGNFqkeCsctKTE+te5oyT9pb8v2QEesAuYLlIvtiGNilWxgdKOQvrvb
         8YPVz148xeKAIED66rnBC+WJoIi+7QpWe/QyWlrvrydgy3DBoY6wH/Dm1U2UsQX+ZAqj
         YGTQ6gkLSmnC/wqBkOfRBl0N9dYQ8EBDQUs7KFKFe8Dhqv2n2X8/15lZxSIpev0c4H+7
         Ksaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOR9IYeIRaAlgZWwW9ka3Koka1PlQedNaDMWfl5P7rhzZEGsDzQWd3V2M5KVBHLDwZ4K1rrqsZAf+BlPLQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.28.23.73 with SMTP id 70mr875279wmx.37.1453253995872; Tue,
 19 Jan 2016 17:39:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <201601191958.u0JJwWro024659@envy.delorie.com>
References: <CAC4O8c88EnAJ1H4YL4rj2O10ihZAz_NYDMSBAWEmdknMNu2b4A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAJXU7q8AtP=UOZrM1e+7Vmimc5kxOjyNrrGjqxcanRTjBWsVDA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<569BCA7F DOT 70903 AT prochac DOT sk>
	<569BCC77 DOT 60700 AT iee DOT org>
	<CAC4O8c9_kMdr+3xhe4-CZvUxPGzgqBrLN=Kn+WdGqGVcV1Nbnw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201601172146 DOT u0HLkPnT008691 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c8u_X54Ro2idbfBf8WToHg0tt2=BJ_irEHcZ7BVH6-_BQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201601191958 DOT u0JJwWro024659 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:39:55 -0900
Message-ID: <CAC4O8c-YYbW5MFG-Na7wPd2YFAmDDOYFm+6QA7ayNAUpDG8jjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] cleaner version of fixes to file format plugin
From: "Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1145a83a31685c0529ba1000
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

--001a1145a83a31685c0529ba1000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

>
> > I made branch home/bkerin/require_C99 a while ago and posted about it
>
> Posting patches is not the same as checking with all the distros we
> want to be in, and OSs we want to build for, and users we want to
> support, and see if requiring C99 would be a problem for any of them,
> then getting the maintainers to agree that it's a reasonable
> requirement, then officially making it a requirement.
>
> This process may or may not be easy, but it hasn't been done.
>

Here's the list of which C99 features became supported in which gcc version:

     https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html

Here's the release history:

     https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html

I looked through and the most recent significant feature I saw was C99
incline function semantics, supported in gcc from March 2008.  Most of it
much earlier.  There are a couple tiny features with more recent support
(e.g. extended identifiers, not that we want those).

We typically want to support more than just the most recent version of
> anything; usually a couple semi-major versions back.  Especially since
> we tend to have users and developers with old software (including me).
>

My machine is ancient too, but no problem with C99.  C99 is about as safe a
bet as there is.  If you go ask the distros if they have it they're likely
to find the question either confusing or insulting or both.  What gcc are
you using for example?

Britton

--001a1145a83a31685c0529ba1000
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, DJ Delorie <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:dj AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank">dj AT delorie DOT com</a>&gt;</spa=
n> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px =
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-=
style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
&gt; I made branch home/bkerin/require_C99 a while ago and posted about it<=
br>
<br>
Posting patches is not the same as checking with all the distros we<br>
want to be in, and OSs we want to build for, and users we want to<br>
support, and see if requiring C99 would be a problem for any of them,<br>
then getting the maintainers to agree that it&#39;s a reasonable<br>
requirement, then officially making it a requirement.<br>
<br>
This process may or may not be easy, but it hasn&#39;t been done.<br></bloc=
kquote><div><br></div><div style=3D"">Here&#39;s the list of which C99 feat=
ures became supported in which gcc version:</div><div style=3D""><br></div>=
<div style=3D"">=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://gcc.gnu.org/c99statu=
s.html">https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html</a><br></div><div><br></div><div=
 style=3D"">Here&#39;s the release history:</div><div style=3D""><br></div>=
<div style=3D"">=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://www.gnu.org/software=
/gcc/releases.html">https://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/releases.html</a><br><=
/div><div style=3D""><br></div><div style=3D"">I looked through and the mos=
t recent significant feature I saw was C99 incline function semantics, supp=
orted in gcc from March 2008.=C2=A0 Most of it much earlier.=C2=A0 There ar=
e a couple tiny features with more recent support (e.g. extended identifier=
s, not that we want those).</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-=
color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
We typically want to support more than just the most recent version of<br>
anything; usually a couple semi-major versions back.=C2=A0 Especially since=
<br>
we tend to have users and developers with old software (including me).<br><=
/blockquote><div><br></div><div style=3D"">My machine is ancient too, but n=
o problem with C99.=C2=A0 C99 is about as safe a bet as there is.=C2=A0 If =
you go ask the distros if they have it they&#39;re likely to find the quest=
ion either confusing or insulting or both.=C2=A0 What gcc are you using for=
 example?</div><div>=C2=A0</div></div>Britton</div></div>

--001a1145a83a31685c0529ba1000--