Re: Is it standard and practical to use long long types?

From: Ioannis Vranos (ivr_at_guesswh.at.emails.ru)
Date: 04/15/04 

Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:33:05 +0300

"Dan Pop" <Dan.Pop@cern.ch> wrote in message
news:c5m02f$5e2$1@sunnews.cern.ch...
>
> Unfortunately, this is not a matter of opinion. Here are a few hard facts
> about your implementation:
>
> 1. Inconsistent documentation. MANUAL.DOC says that -ANSI is the
> right option for putting the compiler in conforming mode. The online
> help says that you need -ansic for this purpose. Only the latter
> is actually recognised by the compiler, but the result is not a
> conforming compiler.
>
> 2. I couldn't find the implementation's document of conformance (maybe
> I didn't try hard enough).
>
> An implementation shall be accompanied by a document that defines
> ^^^^^^^^
> all implementation-defined and locale-specific characteristics
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and all extensions.

The above two are personally unimportant to me.

> 3. Dirty headers. Non-standard functions are declared even when the
> compiler is invoked with the extensions disabled, breaking correct
> C programs. See the example below.
>
> 4. Bogus/idiotic warnings when all warnings are enabled. See the example
> below.
>
> 5. Badly needed warnings not produced even when all warnings are enabled:
>
> T:\lcc>type test.c
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int fileno;
>
> int main()
> {
> printf("hello world %d\n", "bar");
> }
>
> T:\lcc>lcc -ansic -A test.c
> Error test.c: 3 redeclaration of 'fileno' previously declared at
h:\lcc\include
> \stdio.h 149
> Warning test.c: 6 old-style function definition for 'main'
> Warning test.c: 6 missing prototype for 'main'
> Warning test.c: 6 'int main()' is a non-ANSI definition
> 1 errors, 3 warnings
>
> Let's look at each diagnostic:
>
> Error test.c: 3 redeclaration of 'fileno' previously declared at
h:\lcc\include\stdio.h 149
>
> stdio.h has no business to declare an identifier "fileno" when the
> compiler is invoked in conforming mode. Chapter and verse available.
>
> Warning test.c: 6 old-style function definition for 'main'
>
> This one is OK. Except for the fact that the line number is wrong: main
> id defined on line 5.
>
> Warning test.c: 6 missing prototype for 'main'
>
> I can't see any call to main() in my program, so why should I provide
> a prototype for it? And I've been already chastised for using an
> old-style definition for it, right?
>
> Warning test.c: 6 'int main()' is a non-ANSI definition
>
> That's BULL***, Jacob. 'int main()' *is* an ANSI definition. It's even
> a C99-conforming definition for the main function. If you don't
> believe me, ask in comp.std.c.

The above are indeed serious but have you to be insulting? Are you at war or
something? There is no need to hurt our feelings.

> Now, for the missing warnings:
>
> 1. The printf call is obviously wrong, yet the compiler has no objection.

Well it could give a warning but i do not think it could be signaled as
error. However your 3,4,5 are indeed serious.

> 2. main() is defined as returning int, but it doesn't return anything at
> all. Methinks a warning is badly needed.

Nope. Valid C99 behaviour.

> Imagine that YOU were discovering all these things when evaluating someone
> else's work. What would you think?

Thinking is one thing, criticising (and better suggesting) is another thing.
Insulting is a third thing! This guy is trying to create a useful thing for
free, i think he should be encouraged to continue with the right direction.
You also are trying to do a good thing here by making useful suggestions,
but you are doing it in the wrong way!

> For reference, this what I get from gcc, when invoked in conforming mode
> and with additional warnings enabled:
>
> fangorn:/tmp/lcc 387> gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall test.c
> test.c: In function `main':
> test.c:7: warning: int format, pointer arg (arg 2)
> test.c:8: warning: control reaches end of non-void function

Yours must be old. Mine:

C:\c>\mingw\bin\gcc -std=c99 -pedantic-errors -O3 -Wall temp.c -o temp
temp.c: In function `main':
temp.c:7: warning: int format, pointer arg (arg 2)

C:\c>

> No bull*** and only the really objectionable "features" of my program
> are reported. Do you understand now why your compiler looks like a bad
> joke in the eyes of a competent professional, who expects high quality
> tools and not toys, even when they are free?

Behaviour is *very important* if someone does not want to live alone in
another planet.

> >No institution has supported lcc-win32. It is
> >a user supported project. There is no GNU,
> >nor Stallman, nor Microsoft.
>
> This is a lame excuse for not doing the right thing. It doesn't take more
> effort to get things right, you just have to think more seriously about
> what you're doing. I refuse to believe that fixing all the issues I've
> mentioned above takes herculean efforts.

Again nice effort in the wrong way.

> >Not even a simple sentence like
> >"lcc-win32 supports long long" will go unnoticed.
>
> You have a very strange attitude toward bug reports. Yes, it was meant
> as a bug report, because it is not done the right way: -ansic should put
> the compiler in the only conforming mode it can current support (C89)
> and the C99 support should be available *only* when the compiler is
> invoked with extensions enabled. You can also add an additional switch,
> say -c99, that enables all the C99 features currently supported and
> disables other extensions. Again, you can use gcc as an example of
> how to get it right: gcc -std=c89 vs gcc -std=c99. Don't be afraid to
> look at what other people working on similar projects are doing.

GCC does not fully support C99, yet ansi invokes it's C99 spirit.

> On the contrary, you're adopting a paranoid attitude when people report
> them to you, as proved by this very subthread...

If someone suggested something to you and at the meantime was calling you
d**khead, wouldn't you get angry? I think that you don't understand that
others get your words more seriously ad you are missing the fact that the
same words from a completely stranger is a heavy insult than when from a
close friend.

Ioannis Vranos