Simon Josefsson wrote:
> + * doc/gnulib.texi (__func__): Section renamed to func.
> + * doc/gnulib.texi (__func__): Document __func__ module.
I moved out this documentation to a separate file. This will make it easier
in the future to do reorganizations of the manual.
Bruno
2008-03-06
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> ...
Maybe it's just me, but I hate typing _ (it involves a shift key and some
coordination). Can we name i
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ...
>>> Maybe it's just me, but I hate typing _ (it involves a shift key and some
>>> coordination). Can we name it modules/func rather than modules/__func__?
>
> Hi S
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
>> Maybe it's just me, but I hate typing _ (it involves a shift key and some
>> coordination). Can we name it modules/func rather than modules/__func__?
Hi Simon,
> Ouch, I have already pushed it. Should we
Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> According to Simon Josefsson on 3/4/2008 7:39 AM:
> |
> | However, what do you think about this?
> |
> | /Simon
> |
> |>From 232f8a7255f8addd9724156d7d245b51a7feb72e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> | From: Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Date: Tue, 4 Mar
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> However, what do you think about this?
>
> Looks all fine to me.
Thanks, installed.
>> Hm. As far as I can tell, AC_CHECK_DECLS is not restricted to
>> functions, the autoconf manual says "If SYMBOL (a function or a
>> variabl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Simon Josefsson on 3/4/2008 7:39 AM:
|
| However, what do you think about this?
|
| /Simon
|
|>From 232f8a7255f8addd9724156d7d245b51a7feb72e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
| From: Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 15:3
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> However, what do you think about this?
Looks all fine to me.
> Hm. As far as I can tell, AC_CHECK_DECLS is not restricted to
> functions, the autoconf manual says "If SYMBOL (a function or a
> variable) is not declared ...".
Ah indeed. It says this when talking about AC
Simon Josefsson josefsson.org> writes:
> Ah, ok, I thought you talked about the existing 'assert' module in
> gnulib, which looks unrelated to what you are proposing.
I'm actually thinking that that it would be better to make the existing assert
module serve the two orthogonal purposes (provide
Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> According to Simon Josefsson on 3/3/2008 9:07 AM:
> |> I like the idea. I would also like to see the assert module use it, if
> the
> |> platform's assert() lacks __func__ information as required by C99/POSIX
> 2001.
> |
> | How can that be implemented? T
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> Ok to push?
>
> 3 nits:
>
>> +A small function is:
>> +
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> +#include
>> +...
>> +printf ("%s: something happened\n", __func__);
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] smallexample
>
> I don't see a function here. Did you mean
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Simon Josefsson on 3/3/2008 9:07 AM:
|> I like the idea. I would also like to see the assert module use it, if
the
|> platform's assert() lacks __func__ information as required by C99/POSIX
2001.
|
| How can that be implemented? The cur
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Ok to push?
3 nits:
> +A small function is:
> +
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> +#include
> +...
> +printf ("%s: something happened\n", __func__);
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] smallexample
I don't see a function here. Did you mean "A small example is:" ?
> + AH_VERBATIM(__FUNC__, [
> +#
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> As far as I can infer, there is no point in testing
> for anything other than __func__ since all platforms that support other
> symbols also support __func__?
>
> If we find a platform which doesn't have __func__, but have __FUNCTION__
> or something else, we can map the l
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> If there are other pre-C99 compilers that use other ways of printing the
>> function name, I suppose the module could be extended with those.
>
> According to boost/current_function.hpp, it appears that
> - GNU C is not the onl
Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson josefsson.org> writes:
>
>> The __func__ module will add the block above to config.h, to make sure
>> that __func__ is usable.
>>
>> If there are other pre-C99 compilers that use other ways of printing the
>> function name, I suppose the m
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I was unsure where to document this, it isn't either a function or
>> header file, strictly speaking.
>
> I would put its documentation in chapter "Particular modules".
Thanks.
>> AH_VERBATIM(__FUNC__, [
>> #if __STDC_VERSION__ < 199901L
>
> Tests of
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> If there are other pre-C99 compilers that use other ways of printing the
> function name, I suppose the module could be extended with those.
According to boost/current_function.hpp, it appears that
- GNU C is not the only compiler to support __PRETTY_FUNCTION__;
Metr
Simon Josefsson josefsson.org> writes:
> The __func__ module will add the block above to config.h, to make sure
> that __func__ is usable.
>
> If there are other pre-C99 compilers that use other ways of printing the
> function name, I suppose the module could be extended with those.
>
> What do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruno Haible wrote:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> # define __func__ ""
>
> Some packages use
>#define __func__ __FILE__
> in this case. Not perfect, but still more informative than "".
But, wouldn't one normally include __FILE__ in diagno
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> # define __func__ ""
Some packages use
#define __func__ __FILE__
in this case. Not perfect, but still more informative than "".
Bruno
Hi Simon,
> What do you think?
The module is a worthy addition.
> I was unsure where to document this, it isn't either a function or
> header file, strictly speaking.
I would put its documentation in chapter "Particular modules". If/when
the 'inline' module gets documented, one might combine th
22 matches
Mail list logo
