Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cl c  
Sujet : Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”
De : david.brown (at) *nospam* hesbynett.no (David Brown)
Groupes : comp.lang.c
Date : 13. Mar 2024, 23:07:23
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <ust4ib$153rp$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 13/03/2024 19:56, Keith Thompson wrote:
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
On 13/03/2024 16:15, Keith Thompson wrote:
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
[...]
I just tried three compilers and [in absence of -I options] all 3 work
as expected, i.e. ignored stdio.h in current directory.
None of the three was of the variety that you appear to prefer.
Mine's are mundane stuff.
>
However all three took local file when I had given them an option -I.
Not sure what to make of this. Whatever happens with
non-default options is probably in "implementation-defined"
domain as far as the C Standard is concerned, but I still
expected that such common option as  -I would not affect standard
headers.
According to the GNU cpp manual, the "-I" option prepends
directories to
the search path used for <> headers, and the "-iquote" option prepends
directories to the search path used for "" headers.
I find that a bit surprising.
>
You are not quite correct - and I find /that/ a bit surprising!
>
The -I option applies equally to <...> and "..." headers.
 I believe that's consistent with what I wrote, though I probably wasn't
clear enough.
Yes, after reading your expanded explanation, I agree with you here (both parts).  Thanks for that clarification.

To expand on it:
 There are two lists of locations (typically directories).  Let's call
them the <>-list (described in N1570 6.10.2p2) and the ""-list
(described in N1570 6.10.2p3).
 #include <foo.h> searches the <>-list.
 #include "foo.h" searches the ""-list; if that fails, it then searches
the <>-list as if for #include <foo.h>.
 The -I option prepends directories to the <>-list, which means it
affects both #include <foo.h> and #include "foo.h".  But for
#include "foo.h", a foo.h file in the same directory as the including
file will always be found first if it exists.
 [...]
 
The complete description is here:
<https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Directory-Options.html>.
[...]
[slightly reformatting quoted text]
      1. For the quote form of the include directive, the directory of
         the current file is searched first.
>
      2. For the quote form of the include directive, the directories
         specified by -iquote options are searched in left-to-right
         order, as they appear on the command line.
>
      3. Directories specified with -I options are scanned in
         left-to-right order.
>
      4. Directories specified with -isystem options are scanned in
         left-to-right order.
>
      5. Standard system directories are scanned.
>
      6. Directories specified with -idirafter options are scanned in
         left-to-right order.
 What I called the ""-list is described in steps 1-2.
What I called the <>-list is described in steps 3-6.
 [...]
 

Date Sujet#  Auteur
12 Mar 24 * Word For Today: “Uglification”63Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 24 +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”3Keith Thompson
12 Mar 24 i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 24 i `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Keith Thompson
12 Mar 24 +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”11Kaz Kylheku
14 Mar 24 i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”10Tim Rentsch
14 Mar 24 i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”9Keith Thompson
15 Mar 24 i  +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”2Keith Thompson
15 Mar 24 i  i`- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1David Brown
15 Mar 24 i  +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”5Keith Thompson
15 Mar 24 i  i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”4Keith Thompson
15 Mar 24 i  i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”3Kaz Kylheku
15 Mar 24 i  i  `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”2Keith Thompson
15 Mar 24 i  i   `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1David Brown
15 Mar 24 i  `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Tim Rentsch
12 Mar 24 +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”47James Kuyper
12 Mar 24 i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”46Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 24 i +- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Mar 24 i +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”37Kaz Kylheku
12 Mar 24 i i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”36Richard Kettlewell
12 Mar 24 i i +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”22David Brown
12 Mar 24 i i i+* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”20Anton Shepelev
12 Mar 24 i i ii`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”19bart
12 Mar 24 i i ii +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”17Anton Shepelev
12 Mar 24 i i ii i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”16bart
12 Mar 24 i i ii i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”15Kaz Kylheku
13 Mar 24 i i ii i  `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”14bart
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”12Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   i+* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”10bart
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   ii+* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”7Michael S
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   iii+* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”4Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   iiii`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”3David Brown
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   iiii `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”2Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   iiii  `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1David Brown
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   iii+- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1David Brown
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   iii`- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   ii`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”2Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   ii `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1bart
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   i`- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Nick Bowler
13 Mar 24 i i ii i   `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
12 Mar 24 i i ii `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
13 Mar 24 i i i`- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Blue-Maned_Hawk
13 Mar 24 i i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”13Lawrence D'Oliveiro
13 Mar 24 i i  +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”11Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i i  i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”10Richard Kettlewell
13 Mar 24 i i  i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”9Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i i  i  +* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”7Lawrence D'Oliveiro
14 Mar 24 i i  i  i+- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
14 Mar 24 i i  i  i+- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Keith Thompson
14 Mar 24 i i  i  i`* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”4Lawrence D'Oliveiro
14 Mar 24 i i  i  i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”3Keith Thompson
14 Mar 24 i i  i  i  +- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Richard Kettlewell
14 Mar 24 i i  i  i  `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
19 Jun 24 i i  i  `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Tim Rentsch
13 Mar 24 i i  `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
12 Mar 24 i `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”7James Kuyper
12 Mar 24 i  `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”6Lawrence D'Oliveiro
13 Mar 24 i   +- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Keith Thompson
13 Mar 24 i   `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”4James Kuyper
13 Mar 24 i    `* Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
14 Mar 24 i     +- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku
14 Mar 24 i     `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1James Kuyper
12 Mar 24 `- Re: Word For Today: “Uglification”1Kaz Kylheku

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal