x z wrote: > I think an important point was missed in the discussion. Some seem > to focus on the dishonest definition of __GNUC__ by non-GNU C > compilers. That was not my point. My point is that if __GNUC__ is > defined by CPP, not the GNU C compiler proper, (and this seems to be > supported by the CPP Manual,) and any (non-GNU) C compiler can use > CPP, then those non-GNU C compilers would "inadverdently" define > __GNUC__ and lead people to believe that they are GNU C.
Does any non-GNU C compiler use GNU CPP? No. > That is why I think the GNU C compiler should define a macro > independently from CPP. Or, alternatively, __GNUC__ should be > defined by the GCC compiler proper, not CPP. And how can any part of the compiler other than the preprocessor define a macro? Macros do not exist outside the preprocessor. Andrew.
