Re: Status of gcc __FUNCTION__ crippling

["Zack Weinberg" <zack at codesourcery dot com>]

nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) writes:

> Hi, I've tried to look up the current status of the gcc __FUNCTION__
> extension. From the gcc-3.3.2 manual, it seems that string catenation
> with __FUNCTION__ is still deprecated, but not yet removed. Perhaps
> it's still a chance to reverse the decision to remove this feature?

No.  It is gone in 3.4 and will not return.

[...]
> If you remove the good old gcc extension __FUNCTION__, or (as is the
> case when catenation is deprecated) change it in incompatible ways,
> which gcc extension will be removed or crippled next? Should I stop
> using all gcc extensions immediately, if I want to be compatible with
> the next gcc version?

Not all extensions will be removed, but we are of the opinion that
many of them are ill-advised and should be removed.  For instance, 
I expect nested functions will be removed from C and C++ soon, but I
expect __attribute__ and __asm__ to remain for the foreseeable future.

Avoiding use of GNU extensions whenever possible is encouraged;
even if you don't care whether the program is portable to other
compilers, the extensions tend not to have well-defined semantics
compared to the rest of the language, so it is hard to tell whether
the program is correct or not.

zw