Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 59341 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2007 16:03:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Feb 2007 16:03:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 82403 invoked by uid 500); 14 Feb 2007 16:03:22 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 82031 invoked by uid 500); 14 Feb 2007 16:03:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 82020 invoked by uid 99); 14 Feb 2007 16:03:21 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:03:21 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of rooneg@gmail.com designates 64.233.162.226 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.162.226] (HELO nz-out-0506.google.com) (64.233.162.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:03:11 -0800 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id x7so219039nzc for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:02:51 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=NAtx7DZ8lMmMdUFiEtLpDtwQb5zp7TstkEGBvEcxWMqppJ4aIOh/LTeG65HbR7YUEUD9+YyUZBFz+9Diq6NdHefvAHSRk0UFjqR23q1cc5b7Z66qAkyrlJW5oyLVhSxoZc78dSKWTK6NA31Vtx7JuPDRfkhdBt337snJwJmUFco= Received: by 10.114.169.2 with SMTP id r2mr307470wae.1171468970714; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:02:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.115.23.13 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 08:02:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <7edfeeef0702140802r376c9ebam7ca069b6da780bef@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:02:50 -0500 From: "Garrett Rooney" Sender: rooneg@gmail.com To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: 3.0 - Proposed Requirements In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20070214102824.02c7ee48@alum.wpi.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <45D2BB4A.9030803@force-elite.com> <7edfeeef0702140533n49bb40b3w85c320eecb8605c9@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20070214102824.02c7ee48@alum.wpi.edu> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 22050cbac540db5b X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 2/14/07, Greg Marr wrote: > At 08:33 AM 2/14/2007, Garrett Rooney wrote: > >On 2/14/07, Paul Querna wrote: > >>This proposed list of requirements for a 3.0 platform. this list > >>enables > >>a 'base' level of performance and design decisions to be made. If > >>others > >>can make designs work with 'lessor' requirements, all the better, but > >>I'm not worried about it. > >> > >>Proposed Requirements: > >>- C99 Compiler. > > > >Are there any C99 compilers? I was under the impression that GCC was > >close, but nobody else really seemed to be pushing for it (i.e. > >Microsoft doesn't seem to care). > > According to all the information I've found, the only C99 features > that Visual Studio 2005 supports are "long long", variadic macros, > and C++ style comments (which they've supported for years because of > requests from C++ customers). Well, varardic macros are one of the really nice features of c99, but I'm not sure that's really enough justification for requiring it... -garrett