From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 8 17:40:11 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5FB6ABF for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:40:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-oa0-f45.google.com (mail-oa0-f45.google.com [209.85.219.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782DF881 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:40:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id o6so2327650oag.32 for ; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:40:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=bfdkgL5ARPZ6QkRsT9Xfp6pB9rCwD/z0mHXo3+0481c=; b=JNHINCEMnGu2z5bCPj8ji231k0/lNCiSY5ZyMs0knMdw5XDyAym0rziJuCf8AG5Oky Nyyt8mL0H6HXn/FFSVlovtv0uxsv5bIPpAAoi598R+zVjNPbtc4+75iY+0aShrHra9CT Sbz2LxYzFhNqn/4pLgqkf0x7jBgT8lV/LnWAF0egxY+rfN+7RZ/X6pnbB28oiSYzX3q2 7zqM9tQZyVVOg4sKszzijAnYwJOUbreHc9Nm43l6RFf7VuEoxv+Dh9NPXr8IesOZr0iB bRhIGPQew8a4WVwSabVnZapxA4+Er6gECvlCIrWqIBm4B/NRvorAlTzcL8UpvdMOBT3t P8cw== X-Received: by 10.182.88.103 with SMTP id bf7mr2394900obb.7.1362764410543; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:40:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from fusionlt2834a.int.fusionio.com ([209.117.142.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a3sm6569061oee.8.2013.03.08.09.40.08 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:40:09 -0800 (PST) Sender: Warner Losh Subject: Re: c89 broken on head? Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 10:40:07 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <717866F5-8CF6-4E2F-A1C4-BFC894D4D680@bsdimp.com> References: <5138CD6B.2050309@coosemans.org> <5138EA4C.1060001@FreeBSD.org> <5138F6EF.6020203@coosemans.org> <51390682.3020703@FreeBSD.org> <48120A0D-8A96-4D62-9C17-AE40E1DEF026@bsdimp.com> <51391CC1.5050200@coosemans.org> To: Eitan Adler X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmUxfDTAAx0cCo6uBPMaFTQ78oiUROpTLDv9xII5drTaCJcBOSTahIW0jx0zDDlzCxMDSX0 Cc: Tijl Coosemans , freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:40:12 -0000 On Mar 7, 2013, at 8:07 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 7 March 2013 18:03, Tijl Coosemans wrote: >> On 2013-03-07 22:36, Warner Losh wrote: >>> On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Dimitry Andric wrote: >>>> On 2013-03-07 21:22, Tijl Coosemans wrote: >>>> ... >>>>> Because it's the practical thing to do? Old code/makefiles can't = possibly >>>>> be expected to know about compilers of the future, while new code = can be >>>>> expected to add -std=3Dc11. >>>>=20 >>>> I am not sure I buy that argument; if it were so, we should default = to >>>> K&R C instead, since "old code" (for some arbitrary definition of = "old") >>>> could never have been expected to know about gcc defaulting to = gnu89. >>=20 >> My argument was to be practical, i.e. don't change what doesn't have = to >> change. >>=20 >>> -std=3Dc11 is defintely too new, but maybe c89 is too old. >>>=20 >>> I thought the c89 program actually was mandated by POSIX, no? >>=20 >> Both were part of POSIX. c89 was a strict ISO c89 compiler, while cc = was >> c89, but could additionally accept "an unspecified dialect of the C >> language". http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/cc.html >>=20 >> So, if practicality isn't a good enough argument, maybe POSIX = compliance >> is? >=20 > cc is marked as "LEGACY" which is described as optional ("need not be > provided"). > However, I would not be surprised if a non-zero number of ports depend > on cc existing. >=20 > If we are to remove it or change it, I would like to see that preceded > by an exp-run. Removing cc is an exceedingly stupid idea. I think it should be preceded = by the heat death of the universe. It will cause nothing but gratuitous = pain and suffering for our users and gain us absolutely nothing in = return. Do not even think about removing 'cc,' let alone trying to do an = exp-run. The idea is a non-starter and you'd be wasting your time. Warner=