- update chapter 14 w.r.t. switch from c90 to c99 #115
+5
−4
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
levitte
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2025
t8m
requested changes
Oct 16, 2025
Co-authored-by: Tomáš Mráz <[email protected]>
t8m
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
not sure if it follows the proper update process.
back in May/Jun we agreed to use c99. If I remember correct we never discussed if C99 should be allowed on release branches. I feel we branches 3.5 and older should stick to c90 master and 3.6 can should use c99.