Re: Will the World ever see something beyond GNAT 3.15p?

[Martin Krischik <martin@krischik.com>]

Adrien Plisson wrote:

> Martin Krischik wrote:
>> If only there was any C99 compiler. We have 2005 - name me one fully
>> compliant C99 compiler!
> 
> isn't digitalmars supposed to be C99 compliant ?

At least they have

static and type-qualifier-list now supported for array dimension per C99
6.7.5.2.

where gcc is still struggeling. I don't know where the problem is: Ada and
ISO-Pascal have got that feature for decades now.

> i know this compiler is way better standard compliant than many other
> commercial compilers, but i don't know how much of the standard it
> complies to.

They unimlemented feature lists are indeed very short:

C:

New struct member initializer syntax 
tgmath.h 
_Pragma

C++:

Distinction between dependent and non-dependent name lookup. 
Template template parameters. 
export keyword. 
Enums larger than an int.

But still they are not nil. Could it be that the former "slim" langugages C
and C++ have gone the way of PL/1: Become so complex that implemting the
*full* standart is impossible?

With Regards

Martin

-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com