Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!ihlpb!nevin1
From: nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Liber)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: __STDC__ and non-conforming ANSI C compilers
Message-ID: <9710@ihlpb.ATT.COM>
Date: 23 Feb 89 01:34:23 GMT
References: <355@sdti.SDTI.COM> <11762@haddock.ima.isc.com> <9075@elsie.UUCP>
Reply-To: nevin1@ihlpb.UUCP (55528-Liber,N.J.)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Naperville, Illinois
Lines: 14

In article <9075@elsie.UUCP> ado@elsie.UUCP (Arthur David Olson) writes:
|> In fact, its failure to say more will probably doom the plan to define
|> __STDC__ to 2 in future standards.  [Because many programs will write
|> #if __STDC__ == 1   and will break if it ever becomes 2.]

|#if __STDC__ >= 1

You don't really want to do this, since the future standard may not be
100% upward compatable with ANSI C 89.
-- 
 _ __	NEVIN ":-)" LIBER  nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM  (312) 979-4751  IH 4F-410
' )  )			 "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed,
 /  / _ , __o  ____	  briefed, debriefed or numbered!  My life is my own!"
/  (_</_\/ <__/ / <_	As far as I know, these are NOT the opinions of AT&T.