delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
Date: | 05 Nov 2003 07:57:45 +0200 |
Message-Id: | <uy8uvfjc6.fsf@elta.co.il> |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> |
To: | Kbwms AT aol DOT com |
CC: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <5a.240b82cc.2cd980ed@aol.com> (Kbwms@aol.com) |
Subject: | Re: C99 Functions Under Development and Checkout |
References: | <5a DOT 240b82cc DOT 2cd980ed AT aol DOT com> |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> From: Kbwms AT aol DOT com > Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 17:23:41 EST > > On the other hand, if some miscreant user decides to define an > identifier with the name math_errhandling, all bets are off (the behavior is > undefined). The ANSI Standard explicitly says that the name of any identifier with a possibly external linkage is ``reserved'', which is to say applications cannot use them for their own identifiers and assume they (the applications) will work. Imagine a program which defines an identifier named, say `malloc': is there any reason why it should work correctly? I don't think so.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |