On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 08:39:40PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> I like it. And one could reasonably argue that now is the time to change
> since that maximizes the time for folks to find broken code.
Yep, this is definitely stage1 stuff. We still have a few weeks, but
I wouldn't want to rush such a change in the nick of time.
> I'd go so far as to conditionally approve -- if other maintainers don't
> shout out in the next week or so against, then I feel this should go
> forward.
Thanks. I will wait at least until the end of next week.
I'd like to hear from Joseph ;).
> I know it's really early, but a "porting to ..." document ought to be
> started and have something in it about these changes. Both how to fix the
> broken code or how to go back to c89.
Absolutely. I'll start something up once it's in. I feel that
especially the inline semantics change should be addressed therein.
Marek
