Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!seismo!mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!meissner
From: meissner@dg_rtp.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: How About #define foo foo
Message-ID: <1164@dg_rtp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 24-Feb-87 10:01:27 EST
Article-I.D.: dg_rtp.1164
Posted: Tue Feb 24 10:01:27 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Feb-87 05:14:39 EST
References: <6938@ki4pv.UUCP>
Reply-To: meissner@dg_rtp.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Distribution: world
Organization: Data General (Languages @ Research Triangle Park, NC.)
Lines: 20

In article <6938@ki4pv.UUCP> tanner@ki4pv.UUCP writes:
> 
> Would it be desirable for the pre-processor to do something similar,
> so that the following construction might work?
> 
> #ifndef	foo
> typedef	int	(*foo)();	/* my fancy type */
> #define	 foo	foo		/* remember that we know it */
> #endif
> 
> Just curious.  Compiler here blows out on the above (expansion too
> big), but I'd be interested to hear of other reactions to it.

This is the proposed ANSI draft.  The rationale for it is to allow a macro
function which calls the real function by the same name.  Reiser based
C preprocessors generally blow up on this.
-- 
	Michael Meissner, Data General	Uucp: ...mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!meissner

It is 11pm, do you know what your sendmail and uucico are doing?