I guess that as usual, we should use the "common denominator" of all
compilers supported by CPython. For example, if MSVC doesn't support a
feature, we should not use it in CPython.
In practice, it's easy to check if a feature is supported or not: we
have buildbots building Python at each commit. It was very common to
get a compilation error only on MSVC when a variable was defined in
the middle of a function. We are now using
-Werror=declaration-after-statement with GCC because of MSVC!
Maybe GCC has an option to ask for the subset of the C99 standard
compatible with MSVC? Something like "-std=c99 -pedantic"?
Note: I tried -pedantic, GCC emits a lot of warnings on code which
looks valid and/or is protected with #ifdef for features specific to
GCC like computed goto.
Victor
2016-06-07 21:45 GMT+02:00 Guido van Rossum
We should definitely keep supporting MSVC.
--Guido (mobile)
On Jun 7, 2016 12:39 PM, "Sturla Molden"
wrote: Victor Stinner
wrote: Is it worth to support a compiler that in 2016 doesn't support the C standard released in 1999, 17 years ago?
MSVC only supports C99 when its needed for C++11 or some MS extension to C.
Is it worth supporting MSVC? If not, we have Intel C, Clang and Cygwin GCC are the viable options we have on Windows (and perhaps Embarcadero, but I haven't used C++ builder for a very long time). Even MinGW does not fully support C99, because it depends on Microsoft's CRT. If we think MSVC and MinGW are worth supporting, we cannot just use C99 indiscriminantly.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/victor.stinner%40gmail.co...