Re: Deprecated POSIX functions ?
Timothy Madden wrote:
You must be joking !
So Microsoft deprecated all POSIX calls with reason that they
pollute the user namespace for symbol names ?
Yes.
This is so stupid !
Maybe.
It is like Microsoft is saying "we do not provide the POSIX mkdir
function, in order to give the user the freedom to define its own
mkdir function if he/she ever wants to."
If you want to provide a standard C implementation, your standard
headers should contain exactly those names defined by the C standard.
All other non-reserved names could be used for application specific
macros, like
#define fileno 42
which would break any C header using fileno as a function name.
I keep quoting C++ because the MSDN page says fileno() has been
deprecated in favor of the /ISO C++/ conformant _fileno(). However
the C standard (TC2 and the current working draft including TC3)
also shows no mention of mkdir, _mkdir, fileno, nor does it mention
deprecating POSIX functions. When did the C committee say this ?
The C and C++ standards specify the names their respective headers
should contain. fileno and mkdir are not among those names, however
_fileno and _mkdir are allowed for vendor specific extensions.
Can I get a link with more information ?
And then POSIX is not really that intrusive into the user namespace
as people seem to think. Users are required to define
_POSIX_C_SOURCE (or _XOPEN_SOURCE) or _POSIX_SOURCE in order to get
all the POSIX symbol names, and almost all functions require the
user to include specific
POSIX header files in order to get them (except a few, that POSIX
places into the C standard headers, but only if the feature test
macro is defined).
That's for Posix compliant implementations. We don't have that here.
Why are MFC class names not prefixed with an underscore ? Without
the underscore, they pollute the user namespace just like POSIX
functions do ...
Because they are only available if you include non-standard headers.
If you do, you should expect non-standard names. :-)
Bo Persson