Re: Fixing configure failures from newer gcc

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

"Greg A. Woods" <woods%planix.ca@localhost> writes:

> Use of "-std=" is a workaround for the fallout of various platforms
> having switched to compilers that default to wanting to build for gnu23
> when most code is still only compatible with gnu17 at best, maybe only
> gnu99.

No, it's a workaround for upstreams that assume with probing and adding
std.  People have argued that it's legimitate for newer compilers to
have newer defaults, which is an argument that it is buggy to rely on
that default.

But really one can declare either

  packages assume C11 but don't probe/add-std

or

  compilers default to anything newer than c99, ever

as buggy.  We should articular that before making derived statements.
I've accepteed the "it's reasonable for newer compilers to have newer
defaults", and at least that "they are going to do that and there's no
hope talking sense to them".