[SDL] SDL 2.0 ABI locked

Sik the hedgehog sik.the.hedgehog at gmail.com
Tue Mar 19 13:24:23 PDT 2013


If we're going to complain about C89 let's also complain about
targeting C99 instead of C11...

2013/3/19, Ryan C. Gordon <icculus at icculus.org>:
>
>> OK, let me be the Devil's advocate. Why should it target C89? It is
>> a library released *now*, targeting devices which were not even dreamt
>> of in '89.
>
> It's a legitimate question, so I'll give you a legitimate answer: SDL
> 1.2 targets C89--more or less--because there wasn't _any_ system that
> had C99 support at the time.
>
> Even now, SDL 1.2 still supports systems that don't offer C99 (like
> BeOS, which married itself to gcc 2.95's ABI, other embedded devices, etc).
>
> To the Devil's Advocate point: Kernighan and Ritchie C was not what
> reasonable compilers targeted, even many years before SDL 0.1. And
> anyone that's pushed zlib through clang will tell you: it's getting hard
> to compile K&R-style code now.
>
> For SDL2, we're obviously focused on more modern platforms, but most
> Visual Studio installs do not have stdint.h, and the latest version of
> Visual Studio _still_ does not support C99, stdint.h or not.
>
> This is why you're starting to see "//" comments creep into SDL2 (C99
> _and_ Visual Studio support them), but not, say, variables declared in
> the middle of a function.
>
> But mostly, we're not religious about targeting a specific C standard.
> We go with the tradeoff of what works and what makes the codebase nicer,
> and that tradeoff changes over time.
>
> --ryan.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SDL mailing list
> SDL at lists.libsdl.org
> http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
>



More information about the SDL mailing list