Re: Why <config.h> and not "config.h" ?

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org>]

Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es> writes:

> Emacs sources use the idiom
>
> #include <config.h>
>
> 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 <config.h> and <epaths.h> with "config.h"
> and "epaths.h" ?

Given that this is for your own needs, it seems that this is a change
that you can make in your local tree.  The code in question is very
unlikely to change otherwise, so you can always safely stash it/unstash it