On 02/11/2010 11:29, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Manuel Menal, le Tue 02 Nov 2010 11:20:27 +0100, a écrit :
>>> “Macros that begin with E and a digit or E and an uppercase letter may
>>> be added to the declarations in the header.”
>> I'm not a native speaker, but I don't think that means E[A-Z0-9]+
On 01/11/2010 17:14, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Roland McGrath, le Sun 31 Oct 2010 07:39:20 -0700, a écrit :
>> If ED is a problem, then it should just be removed. It's only there as a
>> joke. That said, my recollection is that POSIX does reserve all E[A-Z0-9]+
>> macro names to the implementation
Manuel Menal, le Tue 02 Nov 2010 11:20:27 +0100, a écrit :
> > “Macros that begin with E and a digit or E and an uppercase letter may
> > be added to the declarations in the header.”
>
> I'm not a native speaker, but I don't think that means E[A-Z0-9]+ are
> reserved for error code macros. Only t
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 11:30:28AM +0100, Manuel Menal wrote:
> On 02/11/2010 11:29, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Manuel Menal, le Tue 02 Nov 2010 11:20:27 +0100, a écrit :
> >>> “Macros that begin with E and a digit or E and an uppercase letter may
> >>> be added to the declarations in the header.”
Agreed.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 11:30:28AM +0100, Manuel Menal wrote:
> > On 02/11/2010 11:29, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Manuel Menal, le Tue 02 Nov 2010 11:20:27 +0100, a écrit :
> > >>> “Macros that begin with E and a digit or E and an
