From: Martin Stromberg <eplmst AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
Message-Id: <200101080844.JAA12386@lws256.lu.erisoft.se>
Subject: Re: namespace std
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:44:25 +0100 (MET)
Cc: djgpp AT argentum DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010108091954.4690J-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jan 08, 2001 09:23:58 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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
Precedence: bulk

Eli said:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Stephen Silver wrote:
> 
> > Note that the same temporary macro can (and almost certainly should) be
> > used for each <c*> header.  (Question: What naming convention is used for
> > DJGPP macros?  Is __dj_no_hoist_ acceptable?  Or __dj_via_cplusplus_header_?
> 
> I think both are acceptable, but perhaps others think otherwise.

I think __dj_via_cplusplus_header_ is much better because I understand
what it means. 

What does hoist in this context mean?


Right,

						MartinS