On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:20:59PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > Can we remove __has_include__?
No.
> Its availability results in code which is needlessly non-portable
> because for some reason, people write __has_include__ instead of
> __has_include. (I don't think there is any difference.)
__has_include needs to be a macro, while __has_include__ is a weirdo
builtin that does all the magic. But one needs to be able to
#ifdef __has_include
etc.
Jakub
