Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!sdrc!scjones
From: scjones@sdrc.UUCP (Larry Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Line length (was Re: "Broken" compilers)
Message-ID: <1384@sdrc.UUCP>
Date: 7 May 90 21:49:10 GMT
References: <1990Apr25.165602.974@craycos.com> <1626@tkou02.enet.dec.com> <1645@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Organization: SDRC, Cincinnati
Lines: 33

In article <1645@tkou02.enet.dec.com>, diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com (diamond@tkovoa) writes:
> In article <1374@sdrc.UUCP> scjones@sdrc.UUCP (Larry Jones) writes:
> >Since the preprocessor grammar is token based, the result of
> >preprocessing is a stream of tokens, not logical lines, so the
> >size of the result is not subject to the logical line length
> >limit!
> 
> In Phase 3, "... decomposed into preprocessing tokens ... New-line
> characters are retained."  So logical lines exist even after
> tokenizing.  When do new-line characters go away?  In Pase 7,
> "White-space characters separating tokens are no longer significant."

I'm not convinced that logical lines still exist just because the
new-line characters are preserved as new-line tokens.  I guess
the question is whether logical source line is a well-defined
term which refers explicitly to the result of Phase 2, or an
ill-defined term which just refers to the general concept of
lines.

> It seems that Tom Plum's letter to me agreed with the rules of the
> standard, and the limit applies after macro expansion (as well as
> before).  These rules were not overridden by an example (half-sarcasm
> here), and no one has quoted an official interpretation.

Sounds to me like there should probably be an official request for
interpretation on this issue.
----
Larry Jones                         UUCP: uunet!sdrc!scjones
SDRC                                      scjones@SDRC.UU.NET
2000 Eastman Dr.                    BIX:  ltl
Milford, OH  45150-2789             AT&T: (513) 576-2070
"You know how Einstein got bad grades as a kid?  Well MINE are even WORSE!"
-Calvin