Named initialisers and other hilarity

[Mikhail Gusarov]

You (matthieu.herrb at laas.fr) wrote:

 MH> Because until now we had no other reason to maintain a separate
 MH> X.Org tree for them, and because running code on various
 MH> architecture generally helps validating that so called "portable"
 MH> code really is.

OpenBSD already have shiny new X.Org 7.1. If X.Org stops maintaining
compatibility with gcc-2.95, probably those lazy bastards will keep up
with the progress of the humanity?

Beside OpenBSD there are lots of platfroms to validate "portability"
of the code.

-- 
JID: dottedmag at jabber.dottedmag.net