Re: using GTK_VERSION_CHECK in a preprocessor statement

[jacob berkman <jacob ximian com>]

On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 14:16, Owen Taylor wrote:
> jacob berkman <jacob ximian com> writes:
> 
> > over the weekend, this got added to gtkdoc-scangobj:
> > 
> >     #ifdef GTK_IS_WIDGET_CLASS
> >     #if GTK_CHECK_VERSION(2,1,0)
> >         if (!style_prop && GTK_IS_WIDGET_CLASS (class)) {
> > 
> > when docs are built with this, i get an error:
> > 
> >     missing binary operator before 'EOL'
> > 
> > from the line with the GTK_CHECK_VERSION.
> > 
> > the attached patch to gtkversion.h.in fixes it for me.
> > 
> > owen, should this patch go in, or should gtk-doc use it's own macro that
> > works in this situation?
> 
> What compiler? With gcc-2.96rh and gcc-3.1, it doesn't seem like the
> newline there makes any difference, and, the C standard says that
> all continuation lines are combined before preprocessor directives
> are considered.

i get this with both of these:

gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110)
gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-98)

you can't reproduce this?

> So, it seems that this patch is a compiler bug workaround?  Or is
> there something else I'm missing in the patch other than combining the
> first two lines?

no that's it.

jacob
-- 
"don't get me wrong, i think that radiohead are amazing. i love their
 music and i love their ethos, but that thom yorke guy always seems to
 be complaining." -- moby