Article View: comp.std.c
Article #2054Re: macro substitution in character literals
From: diamond
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 1990 19:32
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 1990 19:32
17 lines
1092 bytes
1092 bytes
In article <14683@smoke.brl.mil> gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <11323@pt.cs.cmu.edu> mbj@natasha.mach.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Jones) writes: >>Is there an equivalent for character literals? >There is no analogous "charize" operator. (True, of course.) >It was deemed to be significantly >less useful than "stringizing", and did not have enough supporters to make >it into the standard. You mean it was not an oversight, that it was deliberate? Well, we certainly see evidence over and over again on the net. "The reports of our non-existence are greatly exaggerated." -- Norman Diamond diamond@tkov50.enet.dec.com If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9012101932.AA14624@decpa.pa.dec.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!ucivax!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucsd!ucbvax!tkou02.enet.dec.com!diamondShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!ucivax!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucsd!ucbvax!tkou02.enet.dec.com!diamond
From: diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com ("diamond@tkovoa")
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: macro substitution in character literals
Message-ID: <9012101932.AA14624@decpa.pa.dec.com>
Date: 10 Dec 90 19:32:45 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 17