Re: Automatically generate variables

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 06:30:00 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Yevgen Muntyan
<muntyan.removethis@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

CBFalconer wrote:

No it isn't. If it had #include "windows.h" it would be.

I'm afraid I can't understand this.

What CBF was trying to say is the <> and "" forms of #include
potentially search different places. By convention. the <> form
searches your system header paths, while "" searches
application-specific paths. However this has nothing to do with
whether a header is ISO standard or not, so the point isn't relevant.

And? Is this program C or not? If not, what is it (just curious
what ridiculous things people can invent instead of using standard
"strictly conforming" term). And please don't tell "this is not standard
C", I didn't say that. I am saying "it is a C program".

It is _potentially_ a C programme. However since we have no idea at
all what is in "windows.h", we can't tell what nonstandard and
nonportable atrocities might be therein. Any one of these could render
the code no longer C.

The point CBF was making here is that had the user supplied the
contents of windows.h, we oculd have been certain whether it was C or
not. As it is, it could be packed with assembler, platform-specific
memory access which violates C standards, etc etc etc.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
.