Named initialisers and other hilarity

Kristian Høgsberg krh at
Thu Sep 21 07:06:32 PDT 2006

On 9/21/06, Matthieu Herrb <matthieu.herrb at> wrote:
> Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I was diving through some KDrive code today and it annoyed me enough to
> > wonder seriously about named initialisers.  A quick straw poll on IRC
> > suggests that we really want named initialisers, inlines (goodbye
> > hundred-line macros of despair), mixed code and declarations[0], and
> > variadic macros (goodbye DPRINTF((x))).
> >
> > Are there any platforms that either support 7.x, or will realistically
> > support 7.x quite soon, that don't support these features?  Full C99
> > compliance is uninteresting since a) the features aren't that
> > interesting, and b) gcc doesn't even do it; but mandating those four
> > specific features would be magic.
> Some of our (OpenBSD) architectures still use gcc 2.95. Please don't use
> features that aren't supported by this compiler.

Why would you want to run bleeding edge on systems that are
still stuck on a 2.* version of gcc?


More information about the xorg mailing list