Re: C89

Bill Coffman <bill.coffman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for the info...

> Apparently,

>    gcc -ansi -pedantic

> is supposed to be ANSI C '89.

Not really. It's pedantic ;)

> Incidentally, I tried adding -ansi and -pedantic and I got lots of
> warnings, like "long long" not supported by ANSI C'89, etc. (how can
> you do 64 bit ints then?).

A C compiler on a 64-bit machine uses long.

> ... I also got errors that caused outright
> failure.  Perhaps it's best to forget the whole C'89 thing.

Not the C'89 thing, but the "-ansi" thing of gcc.

> -Bill

leo