why does Erlang define macros reserved for the C compiler?

[Daniel Goertzen]

Attached a patch that I use deal with the warnings.

Cheers,
Dan.

Matthias Lang wrote:
> Attempting to answer my own question.
>
> A clue from Bengt and some googling gave me an answer for most of the
> defines. At least some of them are GCC voodoo:
>
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.0.3/gcc/Variable-Attributes.html#index-g_t_0040code_007bdeprecated_007d-attribute-1792
>
> Grepping for the __deprecated that started me wondering reveals that
> it's only used in erts/emulator/beam/erl_alloc.h, to mark deprecated
> functions.
>
> Conclusion: the warning can be ignored. It could be eliminated by
> testing for an existing definition before redefining it.
>
> I still don't know why the __SYS_H__ is there. For header files in the
> C library, it makes perfect sense to be using names with leading
> underscores---they're reserved, so you can be sure you don't screw up
> the user's namespace. Using it in Erlang, on the other hand, makes
> no sense. It's probably just historical cruft.
>
> Matthias
>
> --------------------
>
> Matthias Lang writes:
>  > 
>  > I'm looking at erts/emulator/beam/sys.h.
>  > 
>  > When building Erlang, the compiler prints out a bunch of warnings
>  > about __deprecated being redefined. This seems to be C99 7.1.3 in
>  > action, i.e. identifiers starting with _ are reserved for the C
>  > compiler and C library.
>  > 
>  > The defines in that file with leading underscores:
>  > 
>  >   __SYS_H__
>  >   _DOTS_
>  >   _VOID_
>  >   __noreturn
>  >   __deprecated
>  >   _POSIX_SOURCE
>  >   _XOPEN_SOURCE
>  > 
>  > Some of these, e.g. __deprecated, look like some sort of GCC
>  > voodoo. Does anybody know more?
>  > 
>  > Matthias
>
>
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: deprecated.patch
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20060518/0c1153d3/attachment.ksh>