On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Paul Eggert <eggert@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/05/2012 02:49 PM, John X wrote: >> >> How should I set up Autoconf in order to make the compiler enforce >> that? > > > Autoconf is about making programs more portable. > In contrast, requiring each builder to use -pedantic would > make programs less likely to compile, i.e., it'd make them > less portable. > > I'm not saying it can't be done, just that it's not really > Autoconf's goal, which is why the topic doesn't come up much > and why Autoconf doesn't have builtin support for this sort > of thing. Thanks for the answer. It's not that I necessarily want -pedantic, just that it should pick what is the most strict C99 that the compiler supports and in the case of gcc it would probably be something like that. But I don't know which options other compilers like for example clang or icc have in order to accomplish the same thing, I assume that they may not be exactly the same. So in order to keep the program portable I would would like the compiler to generate warnings when various compiler-specific extensions is used. - John _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
