Re: proposed support for C1X-style static_assert

[Andy Moreton]

On Thu 05 May 2011, Bruno Haible wrote:

> Hi Paul,
>
>> it's also nice to support the standard syntax.
>
> Nice work, thanks. Just three remarks:
>
> - A doc update of doc/posix-headers/assert.texi would be useful.
>
> - Use of __ prefixed identifiers:
>> +  struct __gl_verify_type {
>> ...
>> +       int __gl_dummy;                          \
>> ...
>> +     struct { unsigned int __gl_verify_error_if_negative: (R) ? 1 : -1; }
>
>   Identifiers starting with __ are in the namespace of compiler and libc
>   implementation. We've been using identifiers starting with _gl_ in
>   gnulib for many years, with success: no collisions with compiler
>   internals nor with third-party libraries and programs have appeared.
>   Why change that? I would continue to consistently prefix gnulib
>   internals with _gl_ (or _GL_ for the macros).

If you are being extra careful, the _GL_ prefix is also reserved. See
ISO/IEC 9899:1999 7.1.3 "Reserved identifiers" for details.

    AndyM