Re: Proposal: change requirement for tools from C89 to C99

[PHO <pho%cielonegro.org@localhost>]

I'm all for switching to C99! "int i; for (i = 0; ..." have always made 
me anxious!


On 2/2/22 6:36 AM, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 at 14:53, Roland Illig <roland.illig%gmx.de@localhost> wrote:
> > Am 31.01.2022 um 11:14 schrieb Robert Elz:
> > > I don't follow C standards.   What are the c99 features we'd
> > > want to use in tools that don't work in c89?
[snip]
> > * Use the function modifier 'inline' unconditionally.
>
> Or not bother.  The compiler tends to have its own ideas, especially
> when link-time-optimization is enabled.

There is one case you need to bother: inline functions in a header file. 
Compilers decide if they want to inline them or compile them as weak 
symbols, but they never generate strong ones.