X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:07:22 +0200 (EET)
From:	Esa A E Peuha <peuha AT cc DOT helsinki DOT fi>
Sender:	peuha AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: stdbool.h and complex.h
In-Reply-To:	<3FFCF1F4.B86AC9DA@yahoo.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.OSF.4.58.0401081156010.23737@sirppi.helsinki.fi>
References:	<Pine DOT OSF DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0401071356580 DOT 26260 AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi>
	<3FFCF1F4 DOT B86AC9DA AT yahoo DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
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

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, CBFalconer wrote:

> > #ifndef __dj_stdbool__h_
> > #define __dj_stdbool__h_
> >
> > #if (defined(__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L) \
> >   || !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__)
> >
> > #define bool _Bool
> > #define true 1
> > #define false 0
> > #define __bool_true_false_are_defined 1
> >
> > #endif /* (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L) || !__STRICT_ANSI__ */
> >
> > #endif /* !__dj_stdbool__h_ */
>
> I question whether it is necessary to have the __STDC_VERSION etc.
> guard, or even desirable.

Yes, it is both.  If the user asks for strict ANSI C89, then our headers
must not define anything not in that standard, even if any specific
header (like this one) isn't in the standard.  Maybe we should add
warnings like "#warn using stdbool.h while in strict ANSI C89 mode"
(or even #error, since strict ANSI doesn't know about #warn).

-- 
Esa Peuha
student of mathematics at the University of Helsinki
http://www.helsinki.fi/~peuha/

- Raw text -