|Pre-Parsers email@example.com (Jim Granville) (2000-09-08)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers firstname.lastname@example.org (Randall Hyde) (2000-09-09)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers email@example.com (2000-09-13)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers firstname.lastname@example.org (2000-09-15)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers email@example.com (2000-09-21)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers firstname.lastname@example.org (Hans-Bernhard Broeker) (2000-10-08)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers email@example.com.OZ.AU (2000-10-10)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers firstname.lastname@example.org (2000-10-12)|
|Re: Pre-Parsers email@example.com (2000-10-12)|
|Date:||12 Oct 2000 21:57:56 -0400|
|References:||00-09-119 00-09-155 00-10-044|
Hans-Bernhard Broeker <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> [Sorry for jumping in so late, on this... ]
> > I often found source code with something like:
> > #if sizeof(int)==2 ...
> > Here sizeof() must be evaluated by the preprocessor.
> 'Must' is debatable, here. With equal justification, one could say
> that source that contains such lines 'must' be rejected for being
> incompatible with the definition of the language it's supposed to be
> written in...
> Hans-Bernhard Broeker (email@example.com)
> Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.
> [What definition would that be? ANSI/ISO C certainly permits sizeof in
> preprocessor expressions. -John]
Maybe I'm missing something obvious here, but in C89 (at least
according to "ANSI and ISO Standard C; Programmer's Reference" by
Plauger & Brodie) you cannot use the sizeof operator in preprocessor
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.