On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Ismail Dönmez wrote:

| Sunday 13 January 2008 17:41:03 tarihinde Gabriel Dos Reis sunlar? yazm?st?:
| > Ismail Dönmez <ismail@pardus.org.tr> writes:
| > | Hi again,
| > |
| > | Wednesday 09 January 2008 00:28:54 tarihinde Manuel López-Ibáñez sunlar?
| > |
| > | yazm?st?:
| > | > For your particular example, you could open a regression bug against
| > | > 4.3 that says:
| > | > * '"foo' redefined" is not mandated by the standard or it is not
| > | > serious enough, so it should not be a pedwarn just a normal warning;
| > | > or
| > |
| > | Looks like this is actually mandated by standard :-( , thats what I am
| > | told on #gcc anyway :)
| >
| >     #define foo bar
| >     #define foo baz
| >
| > is asking for trouble -- one should look for fixing the source of that
| > inconsistency.
| 
| That was just an example,

I understood that.

| real life testcase shows that problem stems from 
| autoconf and its config.h. Projects end up defining things like HAVE_STDLIB_H 
| twice which is not harmful at all but now causes an error if g++ is used.

The problem is that any semantics of the above -- that is not an error
or silent ignorance -- is order-dependent, which is worse to debug.

-- Gaby