From: Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: gcc 3.2.1 version
Date: 5 Dec 2002 13:29:54 GMT
Organization: Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <asnkci$21j$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References: <04fd01c29ae1$30ba25a0$0600000a AT broadpark DOT no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace: nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 1039094994 2099 137.226.32.75 (5 Dec 2002 13:29:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Dec 2002 13:29:54 GMT
Originator: broeker@
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Gisle Vanem <giva AT bgnett DOT no> wrote:
> The latest gcc doesn't seem to define '_GNUC_PATCHLEVEL'.

Should it?  Says who?

> This little program prints "gcc 3.2", not "gcc 3.2.1" as I would expect.

>   p += sprintf (p, "gcc %d.%d", __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__);

>   #if defined(__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL)
>   p += sprintf (p, ".%d", __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL);
>   #endif

This strikes me as a strange mixup of macro names you're using.  Since
you're already referring to __GNUC__ and __GNUC_MINOR__, the name for
the patchlevel macro should obvsiously be __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ (with
two __ at the end), too.
-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.