[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:29:29 +0100
* Thomas Dickey wrote on Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 11:54:33AM CET:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >AC_DEFINE([foo], [bar baz])
> >The "new" syntax is backward-compatible to the dark ages, and should
> >have been, had it not been for the lazyness of the people in the dark
> >ages, used and promoted from day one.
> actually it is not (being kind, one must assume that you're aware that is
> an oversimplification). It is "mostly" compatible, but not backward
This is news to me, I had previously thought this to be backward
compatible in any possible way. Could you be bothered to explain
in which way it fails this? Pointers welcome.