On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Steve Greenland wrote: > > If every system had up-to-date, standards-conforming > > ctype.h support, we wouldn't have to worry much at all. > > But even these days, pretty many systems with buggy macros > > are still in use. > > Then fix those systems. Pull the necessary stuff out of glibc and use > it rather than the system headers/libc.
You need to do this in a portable way so that it works on every system... > > FYI, as far as I know, the most portable way to use > > the ctype macros is to define wrapper macros > > (e.g., like those below, from fileutils/src/sys2.h) > > and then use only the wrappers (upper-case names) from your code. > > <rant> > What an abomination. I spent way too much of my youth doing crap like > this. I'm tired of it. The standard has been in place for 12 fscking > years. If the vendors aren't going to support it, then those systems > are dead. I've better things to do with my time than make ugly code to > support systems that haven't been upgraded for over a decade. > </rant> It's the choice of the author of a program whether he wants to support older systems or not - and if he wants to support older systems (and many older systems are still running) or systems that don't confirm to a standard he won't accept patches that limit the number of systems his program runs on. I remember that e.g. many GNU programs still support pre-ANSI C compilers. > Steve cu Adrian
