Re: bool and C23

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Samstag, 10. September 2022 06:43:06 CEST Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 9/9/22 04:14, Bruno Haible wrote:
> >    I would suggest to keep*one*  module, and keep it named 'stdbool'.
> >    Its meaning will be "provide bool, true, false according to the standards".
> >    It can invoke AC_HEADER_STDBOOL and AC_C_BOOL under the hood.
> >    The important point is that the migration from older to newer ISO standard
> >    versions is transparent (not troublesome) for the Gnulib user.
> OK, attached is a revised Gnulib proposed patchset that does that. It 
> changes stdbool to assume C99 (since that should be safe now), which 
> means stdbool no longer needs to use AC_HEADER_STDBOOL. It moves the old 
> stdbool stuff into a new module 'stdbool-c99' that's already marked 
> obsolescent, in case someone still needs to port to pre-C99 compilers 
> for some reason.

The documentation has a mistake:

$ make gnulib.html 
date -u -r gnulib-readme.texi +"@set UPDATED %F %T" > updated-stamp
env LANG= LC_MESSAGES= LC_ALL= LANGUAGE= makeinfo --no-split --reference-limit=2000 --html -o gnulib.html gnulib.texi
gnulib-readme.texi:370: @xref reference to nonexistent node `c-bool'
make: *** [Makefile:24: gnulib.html] Error 1

Fix: s/c-bool/stdbool.h/g


[Index of Archives]     [GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux USB]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux