Article View: comp.std.c
Article #5688Re: Re: __STDC__, _POSIX_SOURCE, etc.
From: Bob Lenk
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1989 02:44
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1989 02:44
22 lines
1245 bytes
1245 bytes
> If it is generally going to be the case that the POSIX compilation > environment predefines _POSIX_SOURCE then that is not a good argument. Any environment that does this had better be careful. A reasonable program written to the 1003.1 standard might begin with either #define _POSIX_SOURCE or #define _POSIX_SOURCE 1 > I like the suggestion that 1003.1 publish a clarification of this > whole business. If there are some non-required but generally agreed > techniques for the definition and use of these symbols, perhaps it > would be appropriate to try to steer vendors along the same path also. I agree that agreeing upon and publishing conventions would be useful. How is this different than X3J11 publishing guidelines for the use of __STDC__ covering such things as __STDC__ == 0? Bob Lenk hplabs!hpfcla!rml rml%hpfcla@hplabs.hp.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<12040010@hpfcdc.HP.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!hplabs!hpfcdc!rmlReferences:
<9458@smoke.BRL.MIL>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!hplabs!hpfcdc!rml From: rml@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Bob Lenk) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Re: __STDC__, _POSIX_SOURCE, etc. Message-ID: <12040010@hpfcdc.HP.COM> Date: 31 Jan 89 02:44:11 GMT References: <9458@smoke.BRL.MIL> Organization: HP Ft. Collins, Co. Lines: 22