This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Darwin vs. libstdc++
Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 07:50:47PM +1300, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> > /Users/bryce/cvs/gcc/build/powerpc-apple-
> > darwin1.4/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_cctype.h:59: `iscntrl' not
> > declared
> > [ blah blah blah ]
> > It seems that libstdc++ expects these ctype declarations to be real
> > functions, but darwin's /usr/include/ctype.h only defines them as
> > macros! Apparently every other platform that libstdc++ must declare
> > these as functions, so this is a bug with darwin?
> Certain entities in the standard C library are allowed to be either a
> macro or a function; [...]
Really? I don't see anything in my C89 or C99 specs that suggests
that isalnum and friends don't need function definitions. For one
thing, you can't take the address of a macro, so the standard would
have to say explicitly that the address of isalnum is undefined.