Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: POSIX, ANSI C, and __STDC__
Message-ID: <9475@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 21 Jan 89 22:25:56 GMT
References: <9422@smoke.BRL.MIL> <9445@smoke.BRL.MIL> <9436@smoke.BRL.MIL> <12570003@hpclsue.HP.COM> <915@sfmin.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 13

In article <915@sfmin.UUCP> dfp@attunix.att.com (Dave Prosser) writes:
>On another point, it was stated that __STDC__ cannot be undefined or
>its value be changed.

A strictly conforming program cannot #undef either __STDC__ or
_POSIX_SOURCE.  (I think someone suggested #undefing the latter
to obtain a strictly conforming C environment within a POSIX
implementation.)

Thanks very much for the comments.  They clear up some confusion about
what is going on.  If you want vendors to "follow AT&T's lead" in the
use of __STDC__==0, AT&T had better work with them NOW, because it's
already starting to happen in what appears to be an uncoordinated way.