From: shankar@chromatic.com (Shankar Unni) Subject: Re: .vs. 30 Jan 1997 23:35:57 -0800 Approved: cygnus.gnu-win32@cygnus.com Distribution: cygnus Message-ID: <32F171AB.1980.cygnus.gnu-win32@chromatic.com> References: <009AF2B1.418AF540.8748@ifk20.mach.uni-karlsruhe.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Original-To: dahms@ifk20.mach.uni-karlsruhe.de Original-CC: gnu-win32@cygnus.com Original-Sender: owner-gnu-win32@cygnus.com dahms@ifk20.mach.uni-karlsruhe.de wrote: > I have never heard about the .h-less includes! I assure you, it's been there since at least 1993. See http://www.research.att.com/c++/ , which is an old (1995 April) draft of the working paper, but a decent approximation to the overall structure, at least, of the current document. See the libraries section. > Would it be possible having *identical* contents for both, depending > on _CPLUSPLUS or some such, protected from multiple includes by the same > ifdef, or both just including another, third file with a secure name? It's possible. Actually, the C++ standard has yet another out for this: the C-standard headers are supposed to be "officially" included as , , etc. (i.e. truly conformant programs are not supposed to use either or ), which does solve the problem. But you can't make the same file return different things for C and C++, since it should be possible to #include .... strcpy(...) .... // error if you didn't include the C part but at the same time, #include .... strcpy(...) .... // MUST give an error, else namespace is polluted So you can see - until the ANSI C++ standard is out there and in common use, this thing is a can of worms.. -- Shankar Unni shankar@chromatic.com Chromatic Research (408) 752-9488 - For help on using this list, send a message to "gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".