Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!dgp.toronto.edu!flaps
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
From: flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal)
Subject: Re: macro substitution in character literals
Message-ID: <1990Dec11.173449.1005@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
References: <9012101932.AA14624@decpa.pa.dec.com>
Date: 11 Dec 90 22:34:50 GMT
Lines: 18

>In article <14683@smoke.brl.mil> gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>>There is no analogous "charize" operator.
>>It was deemed to be significantly
>>less useful than "stringizing", and did not have enough supporters to make
>>it into the standard.

diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com ("diamond@tkovoa") writes:
>You mean it was not an oversight, that it was deliberate?
>Well, we certainly see evidence over and over again on the net.

We've certainly seen no reason to write the macro so that it is called like
CTRL(d) rather than CTRL('d').

And the request to be able to write chr(c) rather than 'c' shows an
unfamiliarity or uncomfortableness with C, just like people who #define NL '\n'
(or even worse, define it as 10).

ajr