On 2021-04-11 at 22:12:38, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 11 2021, brian m. carlson wrote: > > > On 2021-04-11 at 11:57:30, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> > >> In this and some other patches we're continuing to add new fields to > >> structs without using designated initializers. > >> > >> Not a new problem at all, just a note that if you re-roll I for one > >> would very much appreciate starting by migrating over to that. It makes > >> for much easier reading in subsequent patches in this series, and in > >> future ones. > > > > I'm happy to do that. I thought we were not allowed to use C99 features > > because only recent versions of MSVC support modern C. I was previously > > under the impression that MSVC didn't support anything but C89, but they > > now support C11 and C17 in their latest release[0], much to my surprise. > > > > If we're willing to require C99 features, then I'm happy to add those. > > I'll also send a follow-up series to require C99 support, which I think > > is overdue considering the standard is 22 years old. > > > > [0] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/c11-and-c17-standard-support-arriving-in-msvc/ > > I don't think we can in general require C99, e.g. I found just the other > day that our CI's MSVC will fail on %zu (to print size_t without %lu & a > cast). That's a shame. I think I'd like to try, though, and ask people to upgrade MSVC to a suitable version if we're going to continue to support it. It's not like there aren't alternatives. So I'm going to send out that series anyway, I think. That's independent of this series, though, so I'll add the designated initializers in v2. -- brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them) Houston, Texas, US
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
