https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109936
--- Comment #8 from Adam Wozniak <adam at wozniakconsulting dot com> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > That isn't the point. The compiler has to tokenize the input in order to > perform the preprocessing step. That means it has to be able to decide what > the bytes comprising the ≠ mean. Are they multiple tokens? A single token > consisting of an identifier? A C++ operator? > > The standard says "Each preprocessing token that is converted to a token > (5.6) shall have the lexical form of a keyword, an identifier, a literal, or > an operator or punctuator." > > ≠ cannot be used in an identifier, and it's none of the other forms either. > > > it should be perfectly legal to use these as arguments. > > By that argument, you could say X(£), but that isn't allowed either. > > > note the emoji passes through flawlessly. > > Not with -Wpedantic i would argue that X(£) should also be allowed. i don't think of the preprocessor as part of the compiler. it's a different step, a different executable, that happens BEFORE the compiler. hence the name, PREprocessor. i cannot argue with "the standard", however.
