Assar Westerlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 24 Apr 2000 02:43:28 +0200
> Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > obviously missing __FUNCTION__ was added by GCC many years ago,
but it was
> > a while before it's use in defines in header (.h) files was dealt
> > properly.
> You mean outside a function? What's the proper way of dealing with
> > I wish these stupid standards committees would just choose
> > something that people are already using rather then make up new
> The problem is that __func__ and __FUNCTION__ are not the same thing.
> And thus it makes sense for them not the use same name.
What's different about them?
__func__ was defined in aztec C nearly two decades ago...I really looked
the appearance of a __func__ pseudomacro -- it made lots of stuff much easier
to understand (as opposed to __FILE__/__LINE__) -- but __func__ had to
be handled by the translater, not the preprocessor...
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message