Amos Jeffries, le jeu. 24 nov. 2022 22:50:57 +1300, a ecrit: > On 24/11/2022 5:41 am, Flavio Cruz wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:51:36AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > Flavio Cruz, le mer. 23 nov. 2022 00:10:10 -0500, a ecrit: > > > > Latest GCC will pick up gnu17 by default but gnu11 will be > > > > better supported with older compilers. > > > > > > Mmm, but why explicitly requesting gnu11 then? Latest GCC will be fine > > > with using gnu17, and older GCC will be fine with using whatever it > > > supports. > > > > I would like to modernize some parts of the mig code (for example, use > > stdbool.h instead of setting up our own boolean type). For this, gnu99 > > would be enough but I thought gnu11 would be fine since it has been > > around > > for some time. > > FWIW, From experience with other code using the -std=*11 options: > This will not just downgrade the specification on latest compilers, but at > times disable newer code safety checks. Making some types of bugs more > difficult to detect.
Indeed. We can just declare that our code requires at least gnu11, and let glibc etc. use gnu17 etc. features whenever the compiler can support them. Samuel
