Assar Westerlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes  on 24 Apr 2000 02:43:28 +0200
     > Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
     > >     obviously missing __FUNCTION__ was added by GCC many years ago, 
but it was
     > >     a while before it's use in defines in header (.h) files was dealt 
with
     > >     properly.
     > 
     > You mean outside a function?  What's the proper way of dealing with 
that?
     > 
     > >     I wish these stupid standards committees would just choose
     > >     something that people are already using rather then make up new 
names!
     > 
     > The problem is that __func__ and __FUNCTION__ are not the same thing.
     > And thus it makes sense for them not the use same name.
     > 

What's different about them?

__func__ was defined in aztec C nearly two decades ago...I really looked
the appearance of a __func__ pseudomacro -- it made lots of stuff much easier
to understand (as opposed to __FILE__/__LINE__) -- but __func__ had to
be handled by the translater, not the preprocessor...


     > /assar
     > 
     > 
     > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
     > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to