------- Comment #8 from graeme at argyllcms dot com 2008-02-09 01:37 ------- I've read this section of the standard, and don't see that it is applicable. "Any function declared in a header may be additionally implemented as a function-like macro defined in the header, so if a library function is declared explicitly when its header is included, one of the techniques shown below can be used to ensure the declaration is not affected by such a macro."
This isn't applicable, since I'm not explicitly declaring the library function fprintf. What I'm declaring is my function (that happens to be called fprintf) as a member of a structure. They are two distinct names and functions in different scopes. The problem is that the function-like macro is being (wrongly) substituted for something that isn't the library function declared in the header. To claim that including a header makes all the identifiers in that header reserved words for everything is simply unworkable I think. Why is a #include file special code that doesn't obey the language scoping rules ? Modern systems may have countless thousands of identifiers in their headers, so how can anyone sitting down to do some programming avoid using any of them for anything, including what are normally private scope identifiers such as structure member names ? This is exactly the opposite of modularization and information hiding! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34710
