Luigi Rizzo wrote: > On the other hand, you wouldn't expect the compiler to fail so badly.
I really do not understand this comment at all. First, all software has bugs, compilers included. The maintainers of those packages then fix the bugs and make new releases. GCC 2.95.3 was released over six years ago. Every version of GCC 3.x and 4.x is able to handle this construct, and they should be, since it is completely valid C. If you want to come up with macros that can be used in exactly the same way that the current ones are, don't require any additional storage and aren't more difficult to maintain, then feel free to contribute them. However, requiring developers to change the way they use the macros, the application to use more memory or increase our maintenance burden, all to support a six year old compiler with dozens of known bugs, seems like a fruitless pursuit. -- Kevin P. Fleming Director of Software Technologies Digium, Inc. - "The Genuine Asterisk Experience" (TM) _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
