After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 596031 - reserved identifier violation
reserved identifier violation
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 79633
Product: glib
Classification: Platform
Component: general
2.22.x
Other All
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: gtkdev
gtkdev
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2009-09-23 04:21 UTC by Markus Elfring
Modified: 2010-01-13 21:06 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Markus Elfring 2009-09-23 04:21:01 UTC 
I suggest to try the search pattern "\b_(?:(?:_(.*))|([A-Z]+))" on source files. A couple of places will be found where names begin with two underscores or an underscore and an uppercase letter.

Examples:
- __G_LIB_H__
  http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/glib/trunk/glib/glib.h?revision=7537&view=markup

- _GBookmarkFile
  http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/glib/trunk/glib/gbookmarkfile.h?revision=6875&view=markup

This does not fit to the expected naming conventions of the C language standard if they are not used for a compiler implementation.

See also:
- Section "7.1.3 Reserved identifiers".
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/n1124.pdf

- Book "The New C Standard: An Economic and Cultural Commentary" by Derek M. Jones
  http://www.knosof.co.uk/cbook/
Comment 1 Sven Herzberg 2010-01-13 12:50:16 UTC 
Why do you consider this as a "major" issue? Does it break anything you know about or is this just an academic issue you wanted to file?
Comment 2 Markus Elfring 2010-01-13 19:30:21 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)

Some source files use identifiers that tamper with the reserved namespace. How would you categorise such a handling of the C language rules?
Comment 3 Christian Persch 2010-01-13 20:55:39 UTC 
Dup of bug 79633 ?
Comment 4 Matthias Clasen 2010-01-13 21:06:45 UTC 
yes

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 79633 ***