From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] master b7fa6b1 1/4: Simplify use of FOR_EACH_TAIL Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:50:07 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20170205213033.19755.8264@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <20170205213034.20306220171@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <96c9c172-8d1f-a452-da68-8a21c2117ed8@lanl.gov> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486504459 6624 195.159.176.226 (7 Feb 2017 21:54:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 21:54:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 07 22:54:12 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbDiB-0001E2-On for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 22:54:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56551 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbDiH-0005sY-E0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:54:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49249) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbDeS-0003aC-5c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:50:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbDeR-00081r-7Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:50:16 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45860) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbDeK-0007ys-Hu; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:50:08 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cbDeJ-0003mc-Vy; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:50:08 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Paul Eggert on Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:04:20 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:212115 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > constraint can be interpreted as meaning (A) when a for-statement > declares an object's name, the name must have storage class auto or > register, or (B) all identifiers declared by a for-statement must name > objects with storage class auto or register. Although I suspect (A) was > intended and that's what GCC does, (B) is also a plausible > interpretation and that's what Clang does. Interpretation (B) disallows > anonymous structs here, as such structs declare member names. Why should we restrict ourselves to cater to Clang? That makes no sense for us. We should write this code the right way, and recommend that people compile with GCC. People who want to compile with Clang can cope in one way or another. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org) Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.