On Tuesday, 09 August 2005 at 19:44, Mads Martin Joergensen wrote: > Why is it BTW, that mutt is still insisting on being C89 (-ansi) when > it's in violation of it in several places. You mean the long strings? > I think we should either fix it, or remove the C89 compiler flag. Fine with me - it seems kind of out-of-date nowadays.