Mail Archives: cygwin/2000/03/13/15:37:20
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 06:58:20PM +0100, Levente Farkas wrote:
>Chris Faylor wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 06:07:43PM +0100, Levente Farkas wrote:
>> >hi,
>> >I thing it's a real bug in ctype.h in cygwin:
>> >-------------
>> >#define _U 01
>> >#define _L 02
>> >#define _N 04
>> >#define _S 010
>> >#define _P 020
>> >#define _C 040
>> >#define _X 0100
>> >#define _B 0200
>> >--------------
>> >and there is no undef pair of these defines. ok you can use every
>> >name with starts with _, but it's a real nightmare (the _X is the
>> >worst).
>>
>> Um, how would you undef these? They're used in macros.
>
>that's another problem:-)
>but simple after use
>#undef _X
Are you actually saying that you want to do something like this:
#include <ctype.h>
main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf ("%d", isalpha(*argv[0]));
#undef _U
#undef _L
#undef _N
#undef _S
#undef _P
#undef _C
#undef _X
#undef _B
Somehow, I don't see the point.
If you're advocating that these be undefined in ctype.h, then:
That won't work.
>>It was my understanding that symbols that begin with "_" were supposed
>>to be the province of a system library and are not supposed to be used
>>by user programs. Or was it "__". I can never remember.
>
>almost both, but such a macros are anoying anyway.
Uh huh.
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
- Raw text -