Re: GNUstep.h (was: Re: Setter Gettor method style)

[Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf]

>On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 10:06:39AM +0100, Bissell, Tim wrote:
>> Check earlier emails on this subject in the list.  ({ and })
>> are untouched by the preprocessor; so it passes through to
>> the C compiler.
>Yes, I know that. And I understand my mistake.
>
>> id valid C (for gcc).  As GNUstep is written for gcc and the
>> gcc Objective-C runtime, using gcc extensions to the C
>> language is a valid policy.
>Well, we are falling down to offtopic ;-)
>
>I mean if you have...
>
>#define SMTH() {smth}
>
>if()
>  SMTH();
>else
>
>...it will be expanded to...
>
>if()
>  {smth};
>else
>
>...and will cause an error (because of two operators after if).
>
>do{}while(0) will work with any compiler, that's all I wanted
>to say.
>

Since the purpose of GNUstep.h is mainly to ease porting apps from GNUstep 
to Cocoa and since Cocoa uses a variant of gcc for compiling this 
discussion is IMHO theoretical. I would leave it as it is (Or does anybody 
know an implementation of OpenStep which doesn't use a gcc derivate?).

I consider the question wether to put GNUstep.h in cvs or on the GNUstep 
website much more important.

>-- 
>Regards, Sir Raorn.
>AIF5-RIPN, AIF5-RIPE, Binec System Administrator.

greetings, Lars