[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: standards/51044 (NetBSD cdefs.h defines __func__ incompatibly with C99)
The following reply was made to PR standards/51044; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>
To: Bruce Lilly <bruce.lilly%gmail.com@localhost>, gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: standards-manager%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost,
Subject: Re: standards/51044 (NetBSD cdefs.h defines __func__ incompatibly with C99)
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 13:26:19 -0700
On Aug 10, 2:48pm, Bruce Lilly wrote:
} On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:17 PM, <dholland%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
} > You are seriously complaining about not conforming to C99 when you select
} > C89?
} No, I am complaining that the NetBSD headers trample on __func__ provided
} by compilers, and redefine it as __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ instead of the
} compiler's definition, based on a __GNUC_PREREQ__ macro, and that
So, by defining that macro, you're claiming to be GNUC, or at
} results in different behavior when compiling with clang on NetBSD only
} (Linux, illumos headers do not trample on __func__). gcc happens to
} define the non-standard __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ as equivalent to
} __FUNCTION__, whereas clang does not. As __PRETTY_FUNCTION__
...but you're not actually compatible. That's your problem.
} is non-standard, and differs among gcc-compatible compilers it should
} probably not be used to redefine __func__, nor is it useful in assertion
} messages, for the same reasons of incompatibility.
}-- End of excerpt from Bruce Lilly
Main Index |
Thread Index |