Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Depending on C99 (Re: GtkBindingS

["ANDREW PAPROCKI, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN" <apaprocki bloomberg net>]

>free, while at the same time blocking its progress for your very
>own closed-source reasons. I suggest you make an internal copy

Well, I think with some of my patches I've been trying to ensure that glib works
 properly in the Solaris/AIX environment to progress glib so that 
non-Linux/non-gcc users can benefit from it.

>if there was a need to do so. It doesn't hurt to update to new standards
>from time to time. Eternal backward compatibility does no good to any
>kind of software.

>Absolutely agree here. It's simply a question of the a minimum set of
>features to agree upon. This set needs to be updated from time to
>time, and closed-sourse in-house software that has not been updated
>for like 20 year doesn't sound like a good reason to hold back
>progress.

Exactly, and I totally agree. My argument, though, is that it is still too soon 
to migrate and fully allow all c99 behavior. I'm not arguing that it should 
_never_ change, just that it is too soon right now because there are obvious 
cases (not just my own.. basically anyone compiling under an old gcc, possibly 
due to a platform not supported under newer gcc versions) that would immediately
 break or be affected. 

Also, to support c99, glib/gtk should do this during a major release. One 
obvious reason for this is so there is a clear defining point at which the code 
requirements changed. A second, less obvious one is that on some platforms (AIX,
 for example), building with c99 requires a certain OS level and runtime 
libraries be installed, breaking ABI.

Andrew Paprocki
Bloomberg LP