Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:19724 comp.std.c:1338
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!pp!pink!rfg
From: rfg@pink.ACA.MCC.COM (Ron Guilmette)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.std.c
Subject: Re: __STDC__
Message-ID: <267@pink.ACA.MCC.COM>
Date: 2 Jul 89 21:02:47 GMT
References: <225800190@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <10448@smoke.BRL.MIL> <12378@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: rfg@pink.aca.mcc.com.UUCP (Ron Guilmette)
Organization: MCC  Austin, Texas
Lines: 29

In article <12378@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit) writes:
>I don't want to open the whole __STDC__ can of worms again, but I
>have two questions:
>
>1. Is there anything to the argument that nobody should be
>   setting __STDC__ to 1 yet, since the standard isn't approved,
>   and that everyone should, at this point, be setting it to 0 to
>   indicate as much conformance to the draft as they can manage...

Are preprocessors supposed to implement floating-point comparisons?
Maye be should have:

	#define __STDC__	0.8

	...

	#if (__STDC__ >= 0.9)

		...

	#endif

Just kidding folks. :-)

-- 
// Ron Guilmette  -  MCC  -  Experimental Systems Kit Project
// 3500 West Balcones Center Drive,  Austin, TX  78759  -  (512)338-3740
// ARPA: rfg@mcc.com
// UUCP: {rutgers,uunet,gatech,ames,pyramid}!cs.utexas.edu!pp!rfg