Article View: comp.std.c
Article #2533Re: Want the word on __STDC__
From: Eamonn McManus
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 1991 18:55
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 1991 18:55
28 lines
1470 bytes
1470 bytes
fred@mindcraft.com (Fred Zlotnick) writes: >... since we know that >nonconforming implementations do in fact sometimes define __STDC__ to >something other than 1, it would be useful to protect your code by using >the test > #if __STDC__ == 1 >rather than > #ifdef __STDC__ There are problems with that, though, quite apart from otherwise conforming hypothetical implementations that define __STDC__ to be other than 1. The replacement of undefined identifiers by 0 may have been a de facto Unix standard but it was nowhere mentioned in K&R1 so it would have been reasonable for a pre-standard implementation to make it an error for a #if to contain an undefined identifier. If I want my code to run on pre-standard implementations (which presumably I do if I care about __STDC__) then I am reluctant to depend on #if __STDC__ or #if __STDC__ == 1 rather than #ifdef __STDC__ which would have been safe had it not been for cretinous implementors who made half-standard implementations with __STDC__ defined but 0. , Eamonn
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<lampblack@dce.ie>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!tcdcs!dce.ie!emReferences:
<4203@lupine.NCD.COM> <15381@smoke.brl.mil> <668288453.3046@mindcraft.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!tcdcs!dce.ie!em From: em@dce.ie (Eamonn McManus) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Want the word on __STDC__ Message-ID: <lampblack@dce.ie> Date: 7 Mar 91 18:55:37 GMT References: <4203@lupine.NCD.COM> <15381@smoke.brl.mil> <668288453.3046@mindcraft.com> Organization: Datacode Communications Ltd, Dublin, Ireland Lines: 28