From owner-soc-status@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 2 08:21:09 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: soc-status@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E850658 for ; Mon, 2 Sep 2013 08:21:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mbw500@york.ac.uk) Received: from mail-ie0-f179.google.com (mail-ie0-f179.google.com [209.85.223.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D47CD2692 for ; Mon, 2 Sep 2013 08:21:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id m16so6284324ieq.38 for ; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 01:21:08 -0700 (PDT) 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:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=MOuY5KNYXYLhTcczCusJeftih/unO43BL0CHmT1XKpg=; b=GEWL0KOt6V/0b+D68yx4pGf3kq7wHlrQfs/65lxHwc+qlAxNJdHg+9ulMwYHfvj9fz fwaozL+KGjUldS09WKPe3iEFxcZIJZtpWI1GMZNmuzS+pVzVPbUlZm0QRKmRaGTIRtcY QsyseuPQ5tzfI441HMH6mCYcIseyWtw31cjbTZqmitzkCfdtpbkJslEXdKbKNnvCy2zC 2ycO1+GrMzu37rrH4nRDoDZeoVro6q3XObIDkvk1UgQAmnGQzUEBfVm4kTelJjTvbyb9 xBbnpeFAq5oiTaF88G1CEy9l1Z7gRXrHMgT1Pr8I9WDB/K6tmQQWQZSijruw4z20H184 j71A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlHrv/eIlIzL+Cc2slhjc1MSFpgsZcvumqArX4//5SAjWSl8G+/g2eUxEAN0FkT51+rBrQL MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.87.36 with SMTP id u4mr11199626igz.40.1378110068077; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 01:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.43.102.193 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Sep 2013 01:21:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <440E5361-BC33-49DD-B51D-C77E9880BD1A@FreeBSD.org> References: <440E5361-BC33-49DD-B51D-C77E9880BD1A@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 08:21:07 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GSoC Status: Week 11 From: Matthew Windsor To: David Chisnall Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Justin Edward Muniz , soc-status@freebsd.org, Eitan Adler X-BeenThere: soc-status@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Summer of Code Status Reports and Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 08:21:09 -0000 Hi, On 2 September 2013 07:42, David Chisnall wrote: > On 2 Sep 2013, at 00:54, Eitan Adler wrote: > >>> As a minor note, I've pushed the C standard back down to C99. This >>> should allow FreeBSD stock gcc to compile the backend. >> >> I'm not very worried about this. If the code is cleaner with C11 >> please feel free to use it. > > Agreed. If the code is destined to live in a port, then the only require= ment is that it must be able to compile with a ports compiler. Ideally, it= should compile with gcc 4.7/8 in addition to clang (since clang isn't avai= lable on all architectures), but this shouldn't be considered a blocker. It's fine, the only feature I was using from C11 was anonymous unions, and the code that used them has since been stripped out, so there isn't any reason to identify as C11. (Besides, I think anonymous unions are a GNU extension to C89/C99 anyway - I'm sure I've seen pkgng using them somewhere and I assume pkgng isn't C11, but I could be wrong) > Also, note that we have tried to ensure that most C11 features (with _Gen= eric being the big exception) work even with our ancient GCC. I'm not sure if I was doing something wrong, but when I tried to compile with --std=3Dc11 on GCC (4.2.1, FreeBSD 9) I got 'cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-std=3Dc11"'. This worked fine with clang. But anyway, the code appears to compile fine as C99 and as mentioned I didn't need to make any regressions, so I'll probably keep it at c99 until and unless I need to use a C11 feature again. ~Matt