> > Wouldn't it be better to check for __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L rather than a
> > list of compilers? (I don't have a source tree close by which is why I don't
> > have a patch.)
>
> Supporting _Bool and claiming support for C99 are independent of each
> other. For example gcc supports _Bool in
>> I'm trying to port compcert to openbsd. Here's a first patch to allow
>> jot to be compiled with compcert.
> Wouldn't it be better to check for __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L rather than a
> list of compilers? (I don't have a source tree close by which is why I don't
> have a patch.)
Supporting _
Wouldn't it be better to check for __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L rather than
a list of compilers? (I don't have a source tree close by which is why I
don't have a patch.)
2013/11/23 Daniel Dickman
> I'm trying to port compcert to openbsd. Here's a first patch to allow
> jot to be compiled with co
I'm trying to port compcert to openbsd. Here's a first patch to allow
jot to be compiled with compcert.
Before the patch is applied compcert fails because _Bool is predefined as
per C99:
# ccomp -fall -c /usr/src/usr.bin/jot/jot.c
/usr/include/stdbool.h:20: Error: illegal combination of type sp
