[MPlayer-cvslog] r27240 - trunk/configure

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 03:17:03AM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 01:54 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 04:21:34PM +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2008-07-12 at 15:07 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 06:47:04PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, 08 July 2008 at 18:11, diego wrote:
> > > > > > Add -std=gnu99 to gcc CFLAGS if supported. This sets appropriate #defines to
> > > 
> > > > > Why the GNU dialect? 
> > > > 
> > > > Because uoti wanted it and thouse who where against it have left the project
> > > > apparently.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Shouldn't we aim for ISO C99 instead (-std=c99)?
> > > > 
> > > > depends on ones goals.
> > > 
> > > Did you fail to understand the reasons I gave in my earlier reply to
> > > Rathann? Or do you claim those reasons are somehow inadequate?
> > 
> > I rather think that your reasons are awnsering a question noone asked.
> > 
> > Diego added -std=gnu99 to supress some warnings
> > What warnings?
> > Why are they there? 
> 
> At least warnings about some C99 standard functions that are not defined
> by headers in C89 mode 

>(without additional #defines at least).

Thats odd, so you do know about -DISO_C... ?
If so why are you suggesting the gnu dialect -std=gnu99 as solution?


> 
> > is the code which produces these warnings correct at all? 
> > Should the code be changed or the warnings be silenced?
> 
> The code which produced those warnings is correct.

So you finally did review all the code in mplayer and concluded
it is all correct? Iam glad, i already feared that you might find it a
little messy here or there.


> 
> > Is -std=gnu99 the only way to silence them?
> > is it the best way?
> > Does -std=gnu99 have other effects that might negatively affect mplayer
> > independant of these warnings?
> 
> Probably not the only way but the most straightforward one; 

I think we want the best solution not the "most straightforward" one.


> we want the
> code to be interpreted as C99, not C89.

true

We also want C99 and not GNU99 as far as that can be done easily.


[...]

> 
> > One negative effect -std=gnu99 will likely have is that it will hide
> > warnings about non-standard gnuisms.
> 
> Wrong.

Finally, ive found you, true furtune teller, what where the next numbers
in lotto?

Not that i would ever dare to doubt your word if you told me that gnu99 does
not mean gnu something and never will. The gnu in there must be a typo i guess

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not
or of what sort they may be, because of the obscurity of the subject, and
the brevity of human life -- Protagoras
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/mplayer-cvslog/attachments/20080713/c2586af7/attachment.pgp>