standards for include guards?

standards for include guards?

[Sam TH]

Without getting into a discussion on the merits of include guards in
GCC, is there some standard for naming such guards?  With the help of
grep, I have found:

 _FILENAME_EXT
 GCC_FILENAME_EXT
 __GCC_FILENAME_EXT__
 _GCC_FILENAME_EXT
 __FILENAME_EXT__
 __filename_ext
 FILENAME_EXT_INCLUDED
 FILENAME_EXT
 _FILENAME_EXT_
 JV_FILENAME_EXT (in java/)
 _DIR_FILENAME_EXT
 _H_f_filename (in f/)
  
Then, the weird ones:
java/parse.h: JV_LANG_H 
gstab.h: __GNU_STAB__
glimits.h: __LIMITS_H_

Maybe something should be picked?
           
sam th --- sam@uchicago.edu --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key
DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss

-- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE7A+dGt+kM0Mq9M/wRAt1EAJ4haEtZaamxZYaXlLzHra8iFv/DlgCfacdI
xwj+2EJxzALt1CMInPjQpbM=
=5j+T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: standards for include guards?

[Fergus Henderson]

On 17-May-2001, Sam TH <sam@uchicago.edu> wrote:
> Without getting into a discussion on the merits of include guards in
> GCC, is there some standard for naming such guards?

This was discussed on gcc-patches a month or so ago, IIRC.
Unfortunately I wasn't able to find it via the search page.

> With the help of
> grep, I have found:
> 
>  _FILENAME_EXT
>  GCC_FILENAME_EXT
>  __GCC_FILENAME_EXT__
>  _GCC_FILENAME_EXT
>  __FILENAME_EXT__
>  __filename_ext
>  FILENAME_EXT_INCLUDED
>  FILENAME_EXT
>  _FILENAME_EXT_
>  JV_FILENAME_EXT (in java/)
>  _DIR_FILENAME_EXT
>  _H_f_filename (in f/)

Names starting with `__' or `_[A-Z]' are reserved for use by the C
implementation.  Standard library header files, and files which
are included in standard library header files, should use such names.
Other header files which are merely used in gcc (e.g. tree.h) should not.

I *think* the convention agreed on earlier was GCC_FILENAME_EXT.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
                                    |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: < http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh >  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.

Re: standards for include guards?

[Mark Mitchell]

We should use this one:

 GCC_FILENAME_EXT

Anything starting with an `_' is invalid for use in user code.
Anything not starting with `GCC' is likely-ish to be used somewhere
else.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

Re: standards for include guards?

[Sam TH]

On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 09:24:33AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> 
> We should use this one:
> 
>  GCC_FILENAME_EXT
> 
> Anything starting with an `_' is invalid for use in user code.
> Anything not starting with `GCC' is likely-ish to be used somewhere
> else.
> 

I can work up a patch for this, but I don't have a copyright
assignment on file, so if someone else wants to, feel free.  
           
sam th --- sam@uchicago.edu --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key
DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss

-- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE7BBvFt+kM0Mq9M/wRAiOrAJ9ZcquX8p7Qc68J0g4e3KuS1DkBWwCeMyzx
YDd29rrJkCfNHaFLIEHMnxk=
=nuUd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----