[commit] Deprecate remaining STREQ uses

[Andrew Cagney]

>> You'll now appreciate my paranoia :-)
>> 
>> So, should the transformation be the strictly mechanical inline expansion:
>> 
>>   STREQ(a,b) =>  (*(a) == *(b) ? !strcmp ((a), (b)) : 0)
>> 
>> or also include a simplification leading to:
>> 
>>   STREQ(a,b) => (strcmp ((a), (b)) == 0)
> 
> 
> Personally, I recommend the latter - I think part of the motivation for
> eliminating STREQ was to get rid of that extra test, right?  If you
> want to do this mechanically, you can just change the definition of
> STREQ first, of course.

My question is somewhat retorical.  I'd expect everyone to express a 
preference for the latter.  What's needed is for people to recognize 
that such a transformation could potentially alter the program's 
behavior.  It shouldn't but if it does it's not my fault.

Andrew