"Christian Jullien" <[email protected]> wrote: (22/05/2009 11:16)
> >Anton, > >It's ok to have a TCC_VERSION human readable but it's also *very* important >to have computer readable cste to adapt code depending on a specific version >if you (or someone else) have to support different versions. > >#if defined(__TINYC__) >#if (__TINYC__ == 1) >/* 0.9.25 or below, XXX feature was missing, use YYY instead but with a >lower precision */ >#elif (__TINYC__ >= 926 || __TINYC__ <= 928) >/* XXX was implemented but hangs if argument is negative ... */ >#else >/* 0.9.29 or above, XXX is fixed for good */ >#endif >#else >/* ANSI C default behavior */ >#endif > If an arithmetical comparison is to be made, why not first treat the value as a string then strip out all but the digits and convert to number? It's presumably not something that must be done often in fast loops so it won't ask a lot to do that. It depends strongly on human conventions either way, so I back Anton's point that the more humanly readable it is, the better. We make machines to help us, no? The other way (along a rather far-fetched continuum) lies the Borg, or the Matrix. :) More to the point, keeping things as humanly readable as possible is the best way to avoid errors, and to reduce over-familiar questions from newcomers. _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
