On 02/10/2010 05:25 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 02/10/2010 04:44 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: >>> According to >>> >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Dialect-Options.html#C-Dialect-Options >>> >>> -std=foobar >>> >>> `gnu9x' >>> GNU dialect of ISO C99. When ISO C99 is fully implemented in GCC, >>> this will become the default. The name `gnu9x' is deprecated. >>> >>> I really can not understand the logic of this. Why not default to ISO >>> C99 and let people enable GNUisms if they wish to? Then code should be >>> more portable across different compilers. With the GNUisms allowed by >>> default, it will make porting code more difficult to other stricter >>> compilers. >> >> This reasoning would make perfect sense if the primary goal of gcc's >> users was to write code to be ported to other compilers. > > I thought gcc's primary aim was to be a *C* compiler. The actual goals of gcc are here: http://gcc.gnu.org/gccmission.html Andrew.
