Message155082
| Author |
skrah |
| Recipients |
Amaury.Forgeot.d'Arc, Jim.Jewett, Ramchandra Apte, amaury.forgeotdarc, benjamin.peterson, casevh, ced, eric.smith, eric.snow, jjconti, lemburg, mark.dickinson, pitrou, rhettinger, skrah, vstinner |
| Date |
2012年03月07日.12:29:09 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.00010462775 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<20120307122909.GB4311@sleipnir.bytereef.org> |
| In-reply-to |
<1331093383.53.0.464429203652.issue7652@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
Benjamin Peterson <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> Speaking of inline, the "inline" keyword will have to go because it's not C89.
Do you happen to know a free compiler that builds Python but does not
understand "inline"? I'm asking because without testing you can never
really be sure:
For example I added support for compilers without uint64_t, but
all major compilers (gcc, suncc, icc, VS) of course have uint64_t.
Then I finally found CompCert, and discovered that a couple of
things were missing in the headers. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2012年03月07日 12:29:10 | skrah | set | recipients:
+ skrah, lemburg, rhettinger, amaury.forgeotdarc, mark.dickinson, pitrou, vstinner, casevh, eric.smith, benjamin.peterson, jjconti, ced, Amaury.Forgeot.d'Arc, eric.snow, Ramchandra Apte, Jim.Jewett |
| 2012年03月07日 12:29:10 | skrah | link | issue7652 messages |
| 2012年03月07日 12:29:09 | skrah | create |
|