On Monday 2007 July 09, Theodore Tso wrote: > > "All identifiers beginning with an underscore are reserved for ordinary > > identifiers (functions, variables, typedefs, enumeration constants) with > > file > > scope." > I think the above does agree with what I said. It says that you can > use functions, variables, typdefs, enumeration constants (not just > labels or structure members) WITH FILE SCOPE. I.e., so long as it > doesn't leak across a .o linkage. So one .o file can use a static I'm reading it as meaning they are reserved at file scope; not that you can use them at file scope. > _my_strdup, and another .o file can use a static _my_strdup, and they > don't have to worry about multiply defined function conflicts, since > they are static functions with file or smaller scoping. Erm, but we're not talking about your own .o files we're talking about conflicting with the library; what you say would be true for any identifier. We have no way of guaranteeing that _my_strdup() isn't defined by one of the standard library headers that have been included. The standard header is entitled to use underscore identifiers because they have been reserved at file scope. Reading a little further into the FAQ you posted, I found the following in the list of exceptions: "You may use identifiers consisting of an underscore followed by a digit or lower case letter for labels and structure/union members." and "You may use identifiers consisting of an underscore followed by a digit or lower case letter at function, block, or prototype scope." I'm more sure now - you can't use underscore identifiers at file scope. Regardless, we're just splitting hairs now. We seem to both agree that it's easiest just to outright not use underscore-prefixed identifiers; so I'm happy. :-) Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@xxxxxxxxx - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
