Re: pre-processing
Sam Steingold <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.clisp.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> * Daniel Jour <[email protected]> [2016-08-28 23:55:18 +0200]: > >> When did // comments go into the C standard? > > C99, "ANSI C" (C89/90) didn't have these yet (but I'd bet the major > compilers wouldn't complain when not in -pedantic mode, didn't check > though.) I am pretty sure we can assume C99 when building CLISP. This means that * varbrace can be dropped (after deleting the "var" keyword) * comment5 can be dropped (after converting the comments) * ccmp2c is needed for new-clx, let it be for now * ccpaux is only needed on SUNWspro - does it even exist still? * deema is not needed on C99 (and C++11) (http://stackoverflow.com/q/33332819/850781) * gctrigger is necessary for GCSAFETY -- keep it! * txt2c is for doc processing, I think we should move away from it (what do other projects use?) The bottom line is that some source pre-processing (specifically, gctrigger) will _always_ be with us, so the transition to automake will have to account for that. The plan for now is to drop varbrace, comment5, ccpaux, deema and rename all sources to *.c from *.d. I would like that to happen _after_ the release. -- Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on darwin Ns 10.3.1404 http://www.childpsy.net/ http://openvotingconsortium.org http://islamexposedonline.com http://ffii.org http://www.memritv.org Vegetarians eat Vegetables, Humanitarians are scary. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ clisp-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clisp-devel