Re: an oldie but a goodie .. ISO C90 does not support 'long long'

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

 



On 11/2/22 18:29, Michael Wojcik via openssl-users wrote:
From: openssl-users <openssl-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Phillip
Susi
Sent: Wednesday, 2 November, 2022 11:45

The only thing to fix is don't put your compiler in strict C90 mode.

I'm inclined to agree. While there's an argument for backward compatibility, C99 was standardized nearly a quarter of a century ago. OpenSSL 1.x is younger than C99. It doesn't seem like an unreasonable requirement.

But as Tomas wrote, anyone who thinks it is can submit a pull request.



    The more that I dig into this and look at the new OpenSSL 3.x the
more I am inclined to think C99 is good enough. Everywhere. Also I doubt
that the age of the thing matters much. The portability does.

    Now I await with a flame proof suit for someone to yell "rewrite it
all in rust!"  Not bloodly likely.


--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional



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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux