Re: Drop Gnulib support for ecvt, fcvt, gcvt, getw, putw?

Paul Eggert wrote: > I should have made it clearer that it was more to avoid confusion than > to optimize. ("Why does Gnulib mess with ecvt?" I wondered.) Oh, I see. Yes, in stdlib_h.m4 we have unconditional invocations of AC_CHECK_DECLS_ONCE([ecvt]) AC_CHECK_DECLS_ONCE([fcvt]) AC_CHECK_DEC

Re: [PATCH 1/1] regex: fix broken clang build

Paul Eggert wrote: > > (defined __apple_build_version__ \ > > ? 600 <= __apple_build_version__ \ > > : 3 < __clang_major__ + (9 <= __clang_minor__)) > This should be protected by defined __clang_major__ for the same reaso

Re: [PATCH 1/1] regex: fix broken clang build

On 6/16/22 16:09, Bruno Haible wrote: (defined __apple_build_version__ \ ? 600 <= __apple_build_version__ \ : 3 < __clang_major__ + (9 <= __clang_minor__)) This should be protected by defined __clang_major__ for the sam

Re: [PATCH] Add xcons example.

On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 17:47:36 +0200 Bruno Haible wrote: > > * doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi (SRFI-1): Add xcons example. > > You surely intended to send this to a guile mailing list? Yes, why do you think not? Should it say guile instead of guix or something else? I'd like to add code examples for

Re: [PATCH 1/1] regex: fix broken clang build

Jeffrey Walton wrote: > I think you should use __apple_build_version__ to differentiate > between Apple Clang and LLVM Clang. Correct; we have seen this already in the past (see e.g. gnulib-common.m4). > LLVM's Clang 9.0 was released September 2021. That corresponds to > Xcode 13 and Apple's Clan

Re: [PATCH 1/1] regex: fix broken clang build

Paul Eggert: > What a mess this stuff is. Maybe it would be simpler to disable all -W > options by default under Clang. That would be a bit extreme. Some of the clang warnings are as useful as the corresponding GCC warnings. Some clang warnings signal problems for which GCC does not have the corr

Re: [PATCH 1/1] regex: fix broken clang build

Darren Kenny wrote: > The use of variable-length arrays (VLAs) is disabled by default in > clang 9 and above. I think this is an incorrect statement. When I compile this file (with pragmas commented out) === foo.c == // # pragma GCC diagnost

Re: [PATCH 1/1] regex: fix broken clang build

Paul Eggert asked: > Can you determine the earliest version of Clang that supports both "# > pragma GCC diagnostic push" and "# pragma GCC diagnostic ignored > "-Wvla""? A quick glance at the archived manuals suggests it goes back > to at least Clang 4 but I suspect it's earlier. Knowing is bett

Re: [PATCH] Add xcons example.

> * doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi (SRFI-1): Add xcons example. You surely intended to send this to a guile mailing list?

[PATCH] Add xcons example.

* doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi (SRFI-1): Add xcons example. --- doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi b/doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi index 2e66bafb9..7aeacd888 100644 --- a/doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi +++ b/doc/ref/srfi-modules.texi @@