From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Why and not "config.h" ? Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:23:20 +0200 Message-ID: <87wrsgs5t3.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280283824 1272 80.91.229.12 (28 Jul 2010 02:23:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:23:44 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 28 04:23:43 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdwJ2-0006rh-Ls for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:23:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52824 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdwJ0-00050F-DC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:23:38 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54424 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OdwIu-000505-0x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:23:33 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdwIt-0005PE-42 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:23:31 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:47939) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdwIs-0005P4-TA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:23:31 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OdwIr-0006pY-9Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:23:29 +0200 Original-Received: from 83.42.13.171 ([83.42.13.171]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:23:29 +0200 Original-Received: from ofv by 83.42.13.171 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 04:23:29 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 12 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.42.13.171 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:REBim0HioycOD4IY30hzWumhSjk= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127903 Archived-At: Emacs sources use the idiom #include Is there a specific reason for this? Usually the curly braces are for headers that live outside the project. Some code analysis tools assume that. And some compilers (including gcc, AFAIK) use a different procedure for locating headers surrounded by curly braces, which may produce unexpected results for headers included from config.h. Any objections to replacing and with "config.h" and "epaths.h" ?