On Tue, 24 May 2022, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > And cases where some support in GCC should
> > definitely be done to consider the feature implemented, even when not
> > needed for conformance (e.g. the %wN, %wfN printf/scanf formats need
> > implementing in glibc, and correspondin
On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 06:11:09PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2022, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > I thought it'd be nice to have a table that documents our C support
> > status, like we have https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html for C++.
> > We have https://gcc
On Tue, 24 May 2022, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> +
This actually looks like a mix of papers approved at the Oct 2020 meeting
and those approved at the Nov/Dec 2020 meeting, though I haven't checked
the lists in detail against those the minutes show as being approved as-is
or wit
On Tue, 24 May 2022, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> I thought it'd be nice to have a table that documents our C support
> status, like we have https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html for C++.
> We have https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html, but that's C99 only.
>
> So here's a patch to
I thought it'd be nice to have a table that documents our C support
status, like we have https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html for C++.
We have https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html, but that's C99 only.
So here's a patch to add just that. For C99, I used c99status.html but
added paper number