2021.01.04 14:23 "[Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Even Rouault
- 2021.01.04 14:55 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Edward Lam
- 2021.01.04 18:43 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Greg Troxel
- 2021.01.05 17:01 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Jeff Breidenbach
- 2021.01.05 20:29 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Kurt Schwehr
- 2021.01.05 20:46 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Kemp Watson
-
2021.01.06 04:45 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by William Bader
- 2021.01.06 10:40 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Even Rouault
- 2021.01.06 14:15 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Bob Friesenhahn
-
2021.01.10 12:12 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Even Rouault
- 2021.01.10 14:54 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2021.01.10 16:27 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Roger Leigh
- 2021.01.15 15:58 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Even Rouault
2021.01.04 14:55 "Re: [Tiff] Motions related to C99 use in libtiff", by Edward Lam
HI Even,
I'm probably missing something.
Motion 2 (requires Motion 1 to pass):
Did you mean this the other way around instead? My position would be to allow use of C99 compilers to _optionally_ use C99 types, and also still allow pre-C99 compilers to build without C99 types.
Best regards,
-Edward