C 99编译器访问 [英] C 99 compiler access
问题描述
我可以在JPL
访问各种不同的平台，他们都有相当不错的C 99编译器。
有些人声称由于缺乏符合C 99标准的编译器，他们还没有达到新标准
。
这只是背滑的蹩脚借口吗？
在文章< cg ********** @ntp1.jpl.nasa.gov>中，
E Robert Tisdale< E. ************** @ jpl.nasa.gov>写道：
我可以在JPL访问各种不同的平台
，他们都有相当不错的C 99编译器。
如果JPL付钱给我写了一些C代码，我会记住它。
- Richard
电子。 Robert Tisdale写道：我可以在JPL访问各种不同的平台
并且他们都有相当不错的C 99编译器。
有些人声称由于缺乏符合C 99标准的编译器，他们没有采用新标准。
这只是背滑的蹩脚借口吗？
是;请参阅第1.42.8节第9段。允许
在数组启动之前向后滑动到任何有效的数组元素或一个元素
，前提是元素是不是实际引用的
。后向滑动量大于
，填充位数未定义; "跛"是指用户在臀部肌肉起泡后通过背部滑动使用了b / b
状态。
但是， "借口"仅用作基本原理的同义词，
并且我们都知道理由是非规范的。
-
Er*********@sun.com
2004年8月27日星期五14:39:40 -0700，E。Robert Tisdale写道：
我可以访问各种各样的JPL的不同平台
他们都有相当不错的C 99编译器。
有些人声称他们没有转向新标准因为缺少C 99兼容的编译器。
这只是背滑的一个蹩脚的借口吗？
据我所知，反对转移到C99的论点依赖于< b / b
假设缺乏一致的实现。
听起来你声称实际上有各种各样的
适合您的实施。如果是这样的话，
那么也许你的观点是好的。似乎有没有什么能阻止你在你的代码中使用C99功能。
但是只是为了确认，请做作者或供应商您所指的编译器和
库实际上是否声称C99符合它们？
它们是否可以被其他平台上的其他人广泛使用？
- Mac
I have access to a wide variety of different platforms here at JPL
and they all have pretty good C 99 compilers.
Some people claim that they have not moved to the new standard
because of the lack of C 99 compliant compilers.
Is this just a lame excuse for back-sliding?
In article <cg**********@nntp1.jpl.nasa.gov>,
E. Robert Tisdale <E.**************@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
I have access to a wide variety of different platforms here at JPL
and they all have pretty good C 99 compilers.
If JPL pays me to write some C code for them, I''ll bear it in mind.
-- Richard
E. Robert Tisdale wrote:I have access to a wide variety of different platforms here at JPL
and they all have pretty good C 99 compilers.
Some people claim that they have not moved to the new standard
because of the lack of C 99 compliant compilers.
Is this just a lame excuse for back-sliding?
Yes; see Section 1.42.8 paragraph 9. It is permitted
to back-slide to any valid array element or to one element
before the start of the array, provided the element is not
actually referenced. Back-sliding by an amount greater than
the number of padding bits is undefined; "lame" refers to the
condition of the user after blistering his gluteal muscles
by back-sliding with insufficient padding.
However, "excuse" is used only as a synonym for "rationale,"
and as we all know the Rationale is non-normative.
--
Er*********@sun.com
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:39:40 -0700, E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
I have access to a wide variety of different platforms here at JPL
and they all have pretty good C 99 compilers.
Some people claim that they have not moved to the new standard
because of the lack of C 99 compliant compilers.
Is this just a lame excuse for back-sliding?
As I understand it, the argument against moving to C99 rests on the
premise that there is a lack of conforming implementations.
It sounds like you are claiming that there are actually a wide variety
of conforming implementations at your disposal. If this is the case,
then maybe your point is a good one. And it would seem that there is
nothing holding you back from using C99 features in your code.
But just to confirm, do the authors or vendors of the compilers and
libraries you are referring to actually claim C99 conformance for them?
And are they widely available to other people on other platforms?
--Mac
这篇关于C 99编译器访问的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
