[MPlayer-cvslog] r27240 - trunk/configure

[Diego Biurrun]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 09:58:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:45:58AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 02:36:59AM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 12:54:37PM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 12:49:16PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > > Could you please post a few of the warnings you where trying to fix. There
> > > > > > may be a more correct and clean way to get rid of them.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Warnings like the following, there was a handful of them:
> > > > > 
> > > > > libmpcodecs/ad_libvorbis.c: In function 'read_vorbis_comment':
> > > > > libmpcodecs/ad_libvorbis.c:48: warning: implicit declaration of function 'vsscanf'
> > > > 
> > > > Well, at least my man page suggests these solutions to that:
> > > > "_XOPEN_SOURCE >= 600 || _ISOC99_SOURCE; or cc -std=c99"
> > > > at least strictly speaking, -std=gnu99 is not among the recommended
> > > > solutions.
> > > 
> > > Ohh lord, this must have been written before the birth of the saviour uoti.
> > > 
> > > > In addition, -D_ISOC99_SOURCE would work in all compilers,
> > > > not just gcc (though ICC probably supports it anyway and no other
> > > > compiler is supported. Still...).
> > > 
> > > Heretic, dont you know that all compilers must use the --std=gnu99 switch
> > > to enable ISO C99 mode, how can you dare to even mention a standard
> > > compliant solution. --std=gnu99 must be used the saviour has decided
> > > and he knows what is best.
> > > Dont be blinded by the mention of these defines in the POSIX spec, they
> > > have been placed by the devil there to confuse you. --std=gnu99 is the
> > > only and best way to compile C99 programs!
> > 
> > Stop flaming already.
> 
> And accept the lies of uoti and your lack of any clue about the subject?

Accept that your current style of discussion is conducive to nothing
except wasting time and energy.

It is also surprising to see you you worry about C99 standards
compliance so much when at the same time when at the same time you never
noticed these issues in FFmpeg.  They got fixed when I enabled this
option...

> > -std=gnu99 is closer to C99 than -std=gnu89, period.  
> 
> That may be true but we did NOT explicitly use -std=gnu89

I disagree that using it implicitly is any better, on the contrary.

> > This change
> > already helped find and fix some non-C99 constructs in FFmpeg.  If you
> > want to see -std=c99 used, then make FFmpeg compilable with that flag,
> > which is a prerequisite for MPlayer to use it.
> 
> I did not suggest --std=c99 to be used. I just said that there are many
> solutions and --std=gnu99 is the worst. And not what we want at all ...
> What iam saying all along is that the standard way to enable various C99 
> prototypes in the headers is
> -D_ISOC99_SOURCE or -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=600 or _POSIX_C_SOURCE
> 
> These are documented for that purpose in the man pages as shown by reimar
> and you can look at the official POSIX standard for example at
> www.opengroup.org. It as well mentions these defines.
> 
> What -std=gnu99 enables is nowhere clearly defined. Its not mentioned in any
> standard document. The assumtation that gnu99 would enable exactly what
> we want to use and nothing we do not want to use due to portability issues
> is ridiculous.
> Its clear gnu99 enabled one of the #defines mentioned above otherwise the
> missing prototypes would not be there as they are protected by #ifdefs
> Its also clear it enabled -fasm.
> What else does it enable? Do we want all of it?

silver:/tmp $ gcc -std=gnu89 -E -dM -x c /dev/null > gnu89
silver:/tmp $ gcc -std=gnu99 -E -dM -x c /dev/null > gnu99
silver:/tmp $ diff -u gnu89 gnu99 
--- gnu89       2008-07-15 00:14:31.000000000 +0200
+++ gnu99       2008-07-15 00:14:37.000000000 +0200
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@
 #define __FLT_HAS_INFINITY__ 1
+#define __STDC_VERSION__ 199901L
 #define linux 1

Is that so scary?

silver:/tmp $ gcc -std=c99 -E -dM -x c /dev/null > c99
silver:/tmp $ diff -u c99 gnu99 
--- c99 2008-07-15 00:38:43.000000000 +0200
+++ gnu99       2008-07-15 00:14:37.000000000 +0200
@@ -29,7 +29,6 @@
 #define __DBL_HAS_INFINITY__ 1
-#define __STRICT_ANSI__ 1
 #define __DBL_MAX_EXP__ 1024
@@ -41,7 +40,9 @@
 #define __i386 1
+#define i386 1
 #define __i486__ 1
+#define unix 1
 #define __i386__ 1
@@ -53,6 +54,7 @@
 #define __STDC_VERSION__ 199901L
+#define linux 1
 #define __LDBL_MANT_DIG__ 64

Is that so scary?

> Why do we not just enable one of the defines directly like the standards
> recommand??? This would work with any compiler.
> --std=gnu99 will only work with gnu compatible compilers. 

I have only enabled this for gcc, as the diff clearly showed.

Diego