"Manuel M. T. Chakravarty" wrote:
> Now that we require the include file to have the suffix
> `.h', the declaration should be unambigious without '!'.
> Or do I overlook anything?
To be exact, we don't require a `.h' suffix, we just don't add `.h' stealthily.
And if I read the ISO C spec correctly, this suffix is not required by it, so
things are still ambiguous. But again, other people on this list would probably
say: You have to write your own header file anyway, so you can give it a name
including the `.h' suffix. :-P
Just to restate my position: I'm against *always* wrapping the header file name
in double quotes, unless
#include "foo/bar.h"
implies
#include <foo/bar.h>
if the first form is not found. I'm not sure about this, although it's guaranteed
the other way round IIRC. It's a little bit awkward being forced to write a
custom header when a system supplied one is the only thing one wants. But this
is not a topic of paramount importance, so I'll probably surrender if there's
no support for my position... :´-( ;-)
Cheers,
Sven
--
Sven Panne Fon: +49/89/99567000 Fax: +49/89/99567461
BetaResearch GmbH, Betastr. 1, D-85774 Unterfoehring
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.betaresearch.de
_______________________________________________
FFI mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi
