Re: [RFC] libstdc++/6720 and libstdc++/6671

[Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>]

On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 04:58:44PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> | I am opposed to any change involving wiring a list of headers into the
> | preprocessor, because it would only raise a debate about which headers
> | should be on the list,
> 
> Since the list of required standard headers is quite well-defined by
> the language definition, that point is moot therefore the opposition also.

You are considering only C++.  A change to the preprocessor has to
consider C also; C89 and C99 both have similar wording (C99 7.1.2p3:

	 If a file with the same name as one of the above < and >
	 delimited sequences, not provided as part of the
	 implementation, is placed in any of the standard places that
	 are searched for included source files, the behavior is
	 undefined.)

but rather different lists of privileged headers.  I don't have copies
of POSIX or SUS to hand, but I would not be surprised to find
analogous lists and specifications there too.

zw