🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4d6673$8to@mailgate.bridgewater.ne.hcc.com>, kennedy@   (John W Kennedy) writes:
> Is there an official statement as to what __STDC__ means?  Does it mean "This
> compiler (in its current operating mode) fully supports ANSI Standard C," or
> does it mean "This compiler (in its current operating mode) disallows all
> extensions to ANSI Standard C."?  In my opinion, common practice and the
> Rationale both support the former, rather than the latter, but is
> there an official ruling?

It means that the compiler defines __STDC__.  :-)

A conforming compiler is required to define it as 1.  A non-conforming
compiler isn't bound by the requirements of the standard, so it can
define it any way it likes or not at all.  Existing implementations are
all over the map:  I know of compilers that always define it (1 if the
compiler is invoked in strictly conforming mode, 0 otherwise),
compilers that define it only in strictly conforming mode, and others
that define it in both strictly conforming and extended modes.  I even
know of one particularly perverse implementation (which is,
fortunately, long gone by now) whose sole ANSI feature was defining
__STDC__.

The bottom line is, despite the committee's good intentions, __STDC__
is essentially useless.
----
Larry Jones, SDRC, 2000 Eastman Dr., Milford, OH  45150-2789  513-576-2070
larry.jones@sdrc.com
I can do that!  It's a free country!  I've got my rights! -- Calvin