Re: PATCH: remove unused autoconf tests

["Jun. T" <takimoto-j@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> 2024/09/16 8:45, Oliver Kiddle <opk@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Given that we decided to allow C99, can the variable array macros also
> perhaps go?

I think so, although variable length array is "optional" in C11
(mandatory in C99).

> While rather newer, does the unicode9 stuff still serve a purpose?

In commit 171e7fa I modified configure.ac so that unicode9 is used if
either wcwidth() or iswprint() is broken on macOS. At that time (May 2017),
if I remember correctly, both functions were broken in the latest macOS
(10.12 Sierra) and maybe older versions of macOS also.

Later Apple has fixed the problem but I don't know when; at least on
macOS 12 (Monterey) unicode9 is not required. If we want to support
older macOS then it would be better to keep unicode9. Or we can just
say to users of old macOS "please use zsh-5.9".

> 2024/09/25 7:43, Lawrence Velázquez <larryv@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2024, at 7:45 PM, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
>> Pre 10.6 of MacOS also gets some special handling. Does
>> anyone regard any of these as still relevant or have evidence that
>> recent zsh would even work on any of them without a lot of work.
> 
> I maintain zsh for MacPorts, and we do have a handful of users who
> continue to use ancient systems.  I goof around on a 10.5 VM every
> so often, and zsh seems to work there out of the box

Does the complier for 10.5 (old gcc, not clang, I guess) support C99?.