Subject: Re: Compiling NetBSD with another compiler.
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Trevor Talbot <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/13/2007 06:04:42
On 10/13/07, Aleksey Cheusov <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> But I still don't understand one aspect.
> >> Why non-portable way of doing this renaming is used instead of
> >> just using macro like
> >> #define func func_new
> >> for the example above. This may work for all compilers, not only
> >> gcc and pcc.
> > The problem is that the #define has far too wide a scope. Names of
> > external functions can also be structure element names, and that
> > would give massive problems with the order of #includes.
> IMHO it's relatively easy to avoid this sort of conflicts in system
> header files. There are only a few tens of renamed functions.
But the scope is not system header files, it's every single program
that uses them.
Why should I have to go through my perfectly legitimate, legal C
program and change all references to the member of my struct that I
named "stat" just because the system headers wanted to rename a