Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!sco!seanf
From: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Standard Clarification
Message-ID: <3535@scolex.sco.COM>
Date: 26 Oct 89 22:43:10 GMT
References: <20974@gryphon.COM> <1150@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <23218@cup.portal.com> <11374@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Reply-To: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 16

In article <11374@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>>Isn't the preprocessor legally and morally bound to recursively
>>substitute macros, at least until a cycle is found?
>Yes; I suspect in the case you reported the compiler failed to look
>beyond the replacement buffer for the () necessary for the getchar()
>expansion to be triggered.  That's a bug.

Which is fixed in MSC 5.1 (I believe).  At least, it's fixed in our Latest
and Greatest compilers for SCO *nix, which are based on MSC 5.1 currently.

Horrible looking code is generated, though (C code, not the assembly).

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "Time has little to do with infinity and jelly donuts."
seanf@sco.COM    |    -- Thomas Magnum (Tom Selleck), _Magnum, P.I._
(408) 458-1422   | Any opinions expressed are my own, not my employers'.