[Freeciv-Dev] Re: client option change callback (PR#1935)

[Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 09:51:25AM -0600, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 03:08:28PM +0000, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Jason Short wrote:
> > > I've also changed the struct initializers to the "new" (C99?) format,
> > > which is far more readible IMO. Feel free to change the indentation as
> > > you like...
> > 
> > I want a decision on this. Is this C99 behaviour portable and acceptable
> > style?
> 
> so we would be wasting suppport for non-c99 compliant compilers based on
> this one change? I don't think so.

I agree.

> I would consider it if there were a more pressing matter, but...

With C99 we get:
 - variable-length arrays
 - long long int
 - // comment
 - mixed declarations and code
 - new block scopes for selection and iteration statements
 - inline functions
 - boolean type in <stdbool.h>
 - and a lot of other stuff

If I had too choose one feature I would take the new block scopes.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 checking for the vaidity of the Maxwell laws on this machine... ok
 checking if e=mc^2... ok
 checking if we can safely swap on /dev/fd0... yes
    -- kvirc 2.0.0's configure