This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: C++ preprocessor bug or not ?

To: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>
Subject: Re: C++ preprocessor bug or not ?
From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 09:52:51 +0000
CC: John Levon <moz at compsoc dot man dot ac dot uk>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: Codesourcery LLC
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102061144440.15285-100000@mrworry.compsoc.man.ac.uk> <20010206191826.L3104@daikokuya.demon.co.uk>

Neil Booth wrote:

> As Dave and Philipp pointed out, CPP is correct.  However, the diagnostic
> is awful.
Thanks to all who corrected me - what a surprising behaviour!

> /tmp/test.c:1:14: operator "defined" requires an identifier
> /tmp/test.c:1:14: ("xor" is an alternative token for "^" in C++)
Excellent!

nathan

-- 
Dr Nathan Sidwell   ::   http://www.codesourcery.com   ::   CodeSourcery LLC
         'But that's a lie.' - 'Yes it is. What's your point?'
nathan@codesourcery.com : http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ : nathan@acm.org

References:
- C++ preprocessor bug or not ?
  - From: John Levon
- Re: C++ preprocessor bug or not ?
  - From: Neil Booth

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]