On Thu, 8 May 2008, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Fair enough. I was merely trying to include something that would adhere to a
> known standard. There's also a AC_PROG_CC_C89 flag that's available as well
> that you might be interested in.
Well, the question comes back: why change the std at all when it used to work
fine and now it doesn't?
> However, you should be aware that "long long" and "bool/_Bool" is not
> allowed per c89 and you should not rely on it.
Of course we don't rely on long long or bool or // or other new constructions
when we speak C89. When I said C89 I truly and really meant C89 compliance.
c-ares has proved to compile fine with such compilers for a long time.
> most likely you're better off relying on some random mode that a compiler
> provides by default.
I think so too. I'll remove AC_PROG_CC_STDC again... Thanks for your help on
this topic!
-- c-ares -- my preferred DNS asynch resolver libraryReceived on 2008-05-09