X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	=?UTF-8?B?SGFucy1CZXJuaGFyZCBCcsO2a2Vy?= <HBBroeker AT t-online DOT de>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.std.c
Subject:	Re: DJGPP v2.05: some thoughts
Date:	Fri, 05 Jun 2015 23:12:58 +0200
Lines:	34
Message-ID:	<ctehmoF328iU1@mid.dfncis.de>
References:	<55673F0B DOT 1090103 AT iki DOT fi> <83twuwwshg DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <55675040 DOT 9030008 AT iki DOT fi> <556F6E49 DOT 8010006 AT gmx DOT de> <556FCCDF DOT 7080005 AT iki DOT fi> <83bngvr0ef DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <557078B1 DOT 9040004 AT iki DOT fi> <201506041613 DOT t54GDT8m014488 AT delorie DOT com> <5570B1F7 DOT 1070509 AT iki DOT fi> <83pp5aprqw DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <mks4nl$1o8$1 AT speranza DOT aioe DOT org> <834mmmp7f0 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <mksolp$uta$1 AT dont-email DOT me> <83zj4enfns DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <mkt09d$uta$2 AT dont-email DOT me>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	news.dfncis.de 8whXk5N0l8ZR4Db1tdB9ogxK1VP9M3pSyGlZG7iVkGHrDO8I6LJ8Ojf+OH
Cancel-Lock:	sha1:iySJmiopWrm33Bic2n3pzT0FQ10=
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
In-Reply-To:	<mkt09d$uta$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes:	2664
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Am 05.06.2015 um 22:19 schrieb Nick Bowler:
> [cross-posting this to comp.std.c for comments]
[But forgot to implement a F'up2....]

> On Fri, 05 Jun 2015 22:01:11 +0300, Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) wrote:

>>> C99§7.5p4 Errors <errno.h>:

>>>    Additional macro definitions, beginning with E and a digit or E and
>>>    an uppercase letter, may also be specified by the implementation.

>> It's indeed present in C89, but I don't see how it reserves these
>> names.
>
> It's reserved for the implementation (DJGPP in this case) because this
> text occurs in a library subclause.

No, it's not.  It says an implementation *may* _define_ additional 
identifiers, but that doesn't _reserve_ those identifiers.

 > You need to go back to the section
> on reserved identifiers.  In particular:
>
> C99§7.1.3p1 Reseverd Identifiers
>
>     ... Each macro name in any of the following subclauses (including
>         the future library directions) is reserved for use as specified
>         if any of its associated headers is included; unless explicitly
>         stated otherwise (see 7.1.4).
>
> This text is also unchanged in C11.

And it doesn't apply to the issue at hand, because none of the 
non-standard errno macros is actually _in_ any of the Library subclauses.

- Raw text -