Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Depending on C99 (Re: GtkBindingSignal cha

["ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN" <apaprocki bloomberg net>]

>does this make? there is no reason why software from the year 2006
>needs to be compiled with compilers from the year 1986.

cc: Sun C 5.5 Patch 112760-09 2004/03/31

That does not look like a compiler from 1986 to me. I said we disable c99 
features for internal reasons. When you are dealing with millions of lines of C 
code (some of which have not been modified since 1986), simply enabling a 
compiler to use c99 is not acceptable without spending a lot of time cleaning up
 code.

We do not use glib/gtk as shared libraries, therefore the archives need to be 
built using our standard build process which mandates how the compiler is 
invoked.

Remember: Just because c99 is a 'standard' does not mean it is standard in 
practice. CSS is a 'standard', but IE is so full of bugs, everyone codes to the 
buggy software rather than the 'standard' because IE is _standard_, not CSS. 
Good developers understand this and write code which is portable and works in 
IE, Firefox, and every other random browser. In my opinion, glib _is_ the buffer
 between different platforms and compiler versions. If glib itself starts 
becoming platform/compiler centric (which it seems to have avoided at all costs 
up to this point), then much of that benefit is lost.

This is exactly what autoconf is for. In the words of Johnny Cochrane:
"If the HAVE_ doesn't exist, you must acquiesce." :)