Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!kddlab!titcca!sragwa!wsgw!socslgw!diamond
From: diamond@csl.sony.co.jp (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Recursive Definitions: Trouble or Bad news?
Message-ID: <10961@riks.csl.sony.co.jp>
Date: 13 Oct 89 02:33:23 GMT
References: <7657@cdis-1.uucp>
Reply-To: diamond@riks. (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Sony Computer Science Laboratory Inc., Tokyo, Japan
Lines: 14

In article <7657@cdis-1.uucp> tanner@cdis-1.uucp (Dr. T. Andrews) writes:
>I should be interested to know the latest ANSI wisdom on a construct
>requesting that token BLUNGE be replaced by itself:
>	#define BLUNGE BLUNGE

This works.  ANSI says that nested replacements do not recognize a
macro name which has already been replaced.  It's not so clear with
more complicated examples though.

-- 
Norman Diamond, Sony Corp. (diamond%ws.sony.junet@uunet.uu.net seems to work)
  The above opinions are inherited by your machine's init process (pid 1),
  after being disowned and orphaned.  However, if you see this at Waterloo or
  Anterior, then their administrators must have approved of these opinions.