Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!spdcc!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ISC.COM (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Oddities in ANSI 3rd review
Message-ID: <5896@haddock.ISC.COM>
Date: 8 Aug 88 18:05:19 GMT
References: <253@gannet.cl.cam.ac.uk> <5806@haddock.ISC.COM> <62866@sun.uucp>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Boston
Lines: 19

[karl@haddock (Karl Heuer) writes that "#define tm_usec __tm_extended_usec" as
a conditionally defined macro would do the job]

[guy@gorodish.Sun.COM (Guy Harris) notes the alternative solution
	struct tm { ...
	#ifdef __EXTENSIONS__
		long	tm_usec;
	#else
		long	__tm_filler_1;
	#endif
	};
but says that this pollutes the namespace with "__tm_filler_N" names.]

Yes, but it's polluting the *implemention's* namespace, not the user's.  The
implementor need only check that the pattern "__tm_*" is not on the (finite)
list of patterns already in use by the implementation.  From the user's
viewpoint, this extension (either yours or mine) is harmless.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint