On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 04:56:51PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 11.09.2011 16:36, schrieb Rich Felker: > > > The standard also explictly allows #undef to avoid using macros, or > > you could change my example to use: > > > > char *(dirname)(char *); > > > > And either way, now it is conforming. > > Either way it avoids the macro expansion, but it still isn't conforming.
How do you make that claim? The C language allows duplicate/redundant function declarations as long as they are non-conflicting, and POSIX specifies a particular declaration (with prototype) for dirname. Unless POSIX somewhere explicitly declared that an application shall not declare functions itself when it has included the header, then by default it is permissible for an application to do so. Rich _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
