Re: Version number macros

  On 9/10/2010 4:07 PM, john.aynsley@doulos.com wrote:
> Jerome,
>
> After process control extensions, the next priority on the list is
> version number macros.
>
> You wrote:
>
> "Speaking of macros, I don't know if this has been planned, but it
> would be great (and standard practice) to specify a way to retrieve
> the version number of the norm that an implementation is following.
> (In our case that would be either 2005 or 2010 for now).
> The ISO C standard defines a macro __STDC__VERSION__ whose value is
> 199901L (integer long) for C99.
> ISO C++ also defines a macro, __cplusplus with value 199711L."
>
> Would you like to make a specific proposal?
>
John, All, (sorry for the slight delay)

to me the best way is to follow the other standards' previous decisions
unless
we've got strong reasons for changing.

So I would propose a macro (to allow test in #if) like this:

__SYSTEMC_IEEE_VERSION with value 201001L

with 2010 be for 1666-2010 and 01 being reserved for minor revisions (as
it is used for c++).

If someone prefer a variations in the name (__SYSTEM_VERSION or
whatever), this is obviously
also ok for us.

Jerome

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.