Re: AC_C_TYPEOF documentation

[Bruno Haible]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Instead of the repetition, why not just s/define @code{typeof}/also &/ ?

Let's see:

"If the C compiler supports GCC's @code{typeof} syntax, define
 @code{HAVE_TYPEOF}.  If the support is available only via a different
 spelling of the keyword (e.g., @code{__typeof__}), also define @code{typeof}
 to that spelling."

To me, this is ambiguous: The reader may understand that "also" means that
'typeof' and '__typeof__' get the same meaning, i.e. that nothing is said
in the second sentence about HAVE_TYPEOF. Or he/she understands it in the
way you mean it, and then it sounds confusing or self-contradictory because then
HAVE_TYPEOF is understood to be defined in that case, although the first 
sentence
says that it should not be defined in that case.

Another proposal is:

"If the C compiler supports GCC's @code{typeof} syntax either directly or 
through
 a different spelling of the keyword (e.g., @code{__typeof__}), define
 @code{HAVE_TYPEOF}.  If the support is available only through a different 
spelling
 of the keyword, define @code{typeof} to that spelling."

Bruno