This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: manual: Refactor documentation of CHAR_BIT.
- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- To: Rical Jasan <ricaljasan at pacific dot net>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 09:53:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: manual: Refactor documentation of CHAR_BIT.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 06/17/2017 04:42 AM, Rical Jasan wrote:
> This single-@item @table is better defined with @defvr, since the
> CHAR_BIT macro has @standards (being declared in a header), and @items
> in @tables are not considered annotatable. Using @defvr automatically
> includes the macro in the Variable and Constant Macro Index and
> ensures its inclusion the Summary of Library Facilities.
This part of the change is OK.
> The file include/limits.h identifies the macro as coming from C99.
I think this macro really was in C90, and
http://flash-gordon.me.uk/ansi.c.txt includes it, which is the closest I
can come to checking. Joseph, do you know for sure?
Note that the comment at the top of the header file
* ISO C99 Standard: 7.10/220.127.116.11.1 Sizes of integer types <limits.h>
should _not_ be taken to imply anything about which standard specifies
which bits of the header. It's meant to point you to the core _overall_
specification for the header, and we seem to consistently refer to C99
for that even when the header existed in C90 (compare libio/stdio.h, for