From owner-freebsd-standards Tue Mar 11 9:54: 7 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B559937B401; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:54:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (pobrecita.freebsd.ru [194.87.13.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6E343FBF; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:54:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ache@pobrecita.freebsd.ru) Received: from pobrecita.freebsd.ru (ache@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nagual.pp.ru (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2BHs3jx004073; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:54:03 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from ache@pobrecita.freebsd.ru) Received: (from ache@localhost) by pobrecita.freebsd.ru (8.12.8/8.12.6/Submit) id h2BHs3Wd004072; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:54:03 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from ache) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:54:02 +0300 From: "Andrey A. Chernov" To: Mike Barcroft Cc: standards@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: CFR: add widely accepted _ISOC99_SOURCE Message-ID: <20030311175402.GA3885@nagual.pp.ru> References: <20030310061548.GA85361@nagual.pp.ru> <20030310104434.P70629@espresso.bsdmike.org> <20030311144501.GA364@nagual.pp.ru> <20030311104943.A88290@espresso.bsdmike.org> <20030311164240.GA2305@nagual.pp.ru> <20030311113754.C88290@espresso.bsdmike.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030311113754.C88290@espresso.bsdmike.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [current@ trimmed...] On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 11:37:54 -0500, Mike Barcroft wrote: > > What to do, if, say, C99 program want to use some POSIX functions from > > lower (and not from higher) POSIX standard? > > I think this is pretty rare. POSIX provides application writers with > lots of time to transition away from deprecated interfaces. What > functions are missing if you change _POSIX_C_SOURCE to 200112L and > remove _ISOC99_SOURCE from the code you posted? If POSIX bumped higher, it compiles cleanly, but I notice that problem with _ISOC99_SOURCE is different: 1) It seems that _ISOC99_SOURCE is Linuxism. 2) In Linux it not means _strict_ C99 environment, but means "turn on C99 extensions". In Linux it is always used _in_addition_ to _GNU_SOURCE, _BSD_SOURCE and other like. It means we can't replace our _C99_SOURCE localism with _ISOC99_SOURCE as in my patch. 3) The question is: should we even support _ISOC99_SOURCE in its current Linux form, i.e. as "turn C99 extensions on"? -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message