Paul Eggert wrote: > By the way, can anybody explain the following comment > in m4/include_next.m4? > > dnl gcc does not warn about some things, and on some systems (Solaris and > Interix) > dnl __STDC__ evaluates to 0 instead of to 1. The latter is an undesired side > dnl effect; we are therefore careful to use 'defined __STDC__' or '1' > instead > dnl of plain '__STDC__'. > ... > -#if defined __GNUC__ && defined __STDC__ && __STDC__ > +#if defined __GNUC__ > /* NextStep 2.0 cc is really gcc 1.93 but it defines __GNUC__ = 2 and > does not implement __extension__. But that compiler doesn't define > __GNUC_MINOR__. */
These two comments refer to systems that were in use ca. 1992-1995. At that time you could use "gcc -traditional", which would not define __STDC__, and on some systems (esp. early SVR4 systems) __STDC__ was defined to 0 by the 'cc' compiler and then also by gcc (since it had to be compatible with the header files - fixincludes was not as good in these days at it is now). Thanks for the cleanup of this extremely old cruft. Bruno
