Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!aurora!amelia!ames!hao!gatech!purdue!umd5!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Machine specific predefined names
Message-ID: <7353@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 26 Feb 88 13:52:04 GMT
References: <1988Feb17.115402.12739@light.uucp> <1988Feb25.080434.29615@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 12
Keywords: library names, clashes

In article <1988Feb25.080434.29615@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>Don't flame him too loudly, Doug.  The crucial point here (implementations
>not allowed to reserve other non-_ names) is an *EXTREMELY SUBTLE* result
>of the wording in the current draft, so subtle that I can easily imagine
>even a compiler implementor missing it entirely.

Well, I'll let readers judge for themselves.  I posted the most relevant
draft proposed standard wording here; it sure didn't seem subtle to me.

Note that this has also been explained in this newsgroup and elsewhere
(for example, in journal articles by Plum and Jaeschke) many times previously.
It's not at all a recent development.