XPost: comp.lang.c   
   From: jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu   
      
   On 2025-08-05 17:13, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   > On 2025-08-04, Michael S  wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 15:25:54 -0400   
   >> James Kuyper  wrote:   
   >>   
   ...   
   >>> If _BitInt is accepted by older versions of gcc, that means it was   
   >>> supported as a fully-conforming extension to C. Allowing   
   >>> implementations to support extensions in a fully-conforming manner is   
   >>> one of the main purposes for which the standard reserves identifiers.   
   >>> If you thought that gcc was too conservative to support extensions,   
   >>> you must be thinking of the wrong organization.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> I know that gcc supports extensions.   
   >> I also know that gcc didn't support *this particular extension* up   
   >> until quite recently.   
   >   
   > I think what James means is that GCC supports, as an extension,   
   > the use of any _[A-Z].* identifier whatsoever that it has not claimed   
   > for its purposes.   
      
   No, I meant very specifically that if, as reported, _BitInt was   
   supported even in earlier versions, then it was supported as an extension.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)