Does "complex xxx" work?

[Zack Weinberg]

Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:

> Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com> writes:
>
> | H. J. Lu wrote:
> |  > c_common_nodes_and_builtins calls
> |  >
> |  >  (*lang_hooks.decls.pushdecl) (build_decl (TYPE_DECL,
> |  >                                get_identifier ("complex float"),
> |  >                                complex_float_type_node));
> | [snip]
> |  >
> |  > What are they used for? I still can't use any of those in C++.
> | 
> | C99 defines a new keyword, _Complex, for creating various complex
> | number types; by including <complex.h>, a programmer can used the
> | synonym "complex" for "_Complex".
> | 
> | I've used these types in gcc-compiled C99 programs, so they must work.
>
> I believe the real question was: Why does GCC treat "complex" (not
> _Complex)  as keyword?  Clearly that is a bug in GCC.

It's a historical extension.

zw