------- Additional Comments From geoffk at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-15 22:34 ------- (In reply to comment #39) > Another reason why spelling needs preserving (in addition to implementing # > correctly) is for the constraints on duplicate macro definitions. > > #define foo \u00c1 > #define foo \u00C1 > > is invalid (different spelling in replacement), as is
We discussed this on the list and decided that this was probably a defect in the C standard, since the Rationale says that the kind of implementation we have now is supposed to be permitted, and jsm said he'd file a DR. How's that going? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9449
