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
Precedence: bulk

> 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.