Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
>> > About this change of fts.c from 2011-08-18.
>> > The declaration of max_entries in line 1339 comes after a statement. Not
>> > valid C99.
>>
>> s/C99/C89/
>
> Oops, yes. Not valid C89.
>
>> C89 is now more than 12 years old
>
> You meant s/C89/C99/ ?
No, I mean
Hi Jim,
> > About this change of fts.c from 2011-08-18.
> > The declaration of max_entries in line 1339 comes after a statement. Not
> > valid C99.
>
> s/C99/C89/
Oops, yes. Not valid C89.
> C89 is now more than 12 years old
You meant s/C89/C99/ ?
> I see so much more value in using C99's dec
