From -2643417000734746283 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,6949d6499f54708 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: matt@dogbert.lbl.gov (Matthew Austern) Subject: Re: Stupid Preprocessor Question Date: 1995/05/21 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 102964194 references: <41d7cb$03325.3a@rd.surface.com> <527cb$10181a.1ab@rd.surface.com> organization: University of California at Berkeley reply-to: matt@physics.berkeley.edu newsgroups: comp.std.c++ In article <9514102.2925@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> fjh@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) writes: [Regarding which directories get searched in #include directives when the directives are contained in header files that are, themselves, included by files in other directories.] > > I agree with RFG that it is a pity this area has not been standardized. I do too. On the other hand, I can understand why it hasn't been standardized: anything that has to deal with file names and directories just can't possibly be portable. What would you do about VMS, whose syntax for specifying directories is very different from Unix's, and what would you do with operating systems that have flat filesystems? It would be very difficult to come up with wording that both was useful and that didn't make too many assumptions about the operating system. I agree that Borland's behavior is clearly wrong ("an implementation must not only be standard-conforming but also useful"), so I'm in the uncomfortable position of saying that there is one correct form of behavior but that that behavior probably shouldn't be specified in the standard. I have trouble seeing a way out of that dilemna, though. -- Matt Austern matt@physics.berkeley.edu http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt