Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Post History
Is -isystem/path/to/sys/includes a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang, and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability? I couldn't find th...
#4: Post edited
Is `-isystem=/path/to/sys/includes` a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang, and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability?- I couldn't find the POSIX specification for cc(1).
- Is `-isystem/path/to/sys/includes` a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang, and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability?
- I couldn't find the POSIX specification for cc(1).
#3: Post edited
Is `-isystem=/path/to/sys/includes` a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability?- I couldn't find the POSIX specification for cc(1).
- Is `-isystem=/path/to/sys/includes` a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang, and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability?
- I couldn't find the POSIX specification for cc(1).
#2: Post edited
- Is `-isystem=/path/to/sys/includes` a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability?
- I couldn't find the POSIX specification for cc(1).
- Is `-isystem=/path/to/sys/includes` a standard compiler option, or is it a compiler extension implemented by gcc, clang and maybe other compilers? Can I rely on its availability?
- I couldn't find the POSIX specification for cc(1).