Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucbvax!rchland.ibm.com!turner
From: turner@rchland.ibm.com (Mark Turner)
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.andrew
Subject: Possible bug in class preprocessor
Message-ID: <Qak75Ws91E4ZI0zc1J@rchland.ibm.com>
Date: 8 Aug 90 20:09:06 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: <turner@ibm.com>
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 61

We've come across a possible bug in the class preprocessor.

It has to do with defining macromethods with the word 'data' in them.

Example:

    class test : view
    {
        macromethods:
          push(char *elem) test_push((self), elem);
    };


when run through the class preprocessor, produces a line in the .ih file
likethis:

    #define test_push(self,elem) \
     test_push(((self)), elem);

which is fine.

However, changing the definition slightly,

    class test : view
    {
        macromethods:
          push(char *data) test_push((self), data);
    };


produces the line

    #define test_push(self,char) \
     test_push(((self)), data);


which fails miserably because nowhere does 'data' appear in the in the
macrodefinition portion.

Even more fun is running the following through the preprocessor:

    class test : view
    {
        macromethods:
          push(data) test_push((self), data);
    };

which produces

    #define test_push(self,rew/include/atk/view.ch) \
     test_push(((self)), data);



I don't know if data is a reserved word, and if so, I could live withit.
 However, there are classes in the distribution  (list, forexample)
which use the word 'data' in their macro definitions.

So is this a bug?

Scott Stekel  -  IBM Rochester