Re: many packages __FUNCTION__ problems

[Ali Akcaagac <ali akcaagac stud fh-wilhelmshaven de>]

On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 23:43, Owen Taylor wrote:
> If code deals with __FUNCTION__ directly, it should just be patched in the mode:
> 
>  sprintf (__FUNCTION__ ": An error occurred);
> 
> Goes to:
> 
>  sprintf ("%s: An error occurred, __FUNCTION__);
> 
> No configure checks necessary.

ahh (a lamp goes on:), i think i was to fast with my last mail.. yes the
way you describe works perfectly. instead of concatenating __FUNCTION__
use %s (2nd example).

the reason why i made a workaround of this problem is, is because i am
not 100% sure if __FUNCTION__ will get removed in the future completely.
since getting a warning about things beeing depracted and removed in the
future (also as written in the gcc info) would show me this. so instead
using a formated string output, i checked wether the compiler supports
these things. now we can argue which of both solutions is better but i
still vote for the way in checking if the compiler understands it or
not.

-- 
Name....: Ali Akcaagac
Status..: Student Of Computer & Economic Science
E-Mail..: mailto:ali akcaagac stud fh-wilhelmshaven de
WWW.....: http://www.fh-wilhelmshaven.de/~akcaagaa