Re: C89 vs. C99

On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Fleshgrinder <php@fleshgrinder.com> wrote: > I am curious why we are not finally doing the switch to C99 with VC14 > finally supporting most of C99. I mean, I know that GCC and VC14 do no > fully support C99 but the most common features are implemented: > > - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C99#Implementations > - https://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html > Hi, It's time to bring this up again. I recently noticed that nowadays only Kalle fixes Windows build issues due to C99 declarations-after-code, while Anatol doesn't. Am I correct in the assumption that Anatol is using an MSVC version that supports the necessary subset of C99, while Kalle uses an older version that doesn't support this yet? If so, is it viable for us to drop support for these older MSVC versions for master? I'd really like to be able to use certain C99 functionality (okay, I'm only really interested in declarations mixed with code). Thanks, Nikita