[Click] #include <cstdarg> vs. #include <stdarg.h>

[Douglas S. J. De Couto]

i don't remember if stdio.h caused problems; maybe it comes from Scott
Page's work with other very compilers?

here's more pedantic info:

if, for whatever reason, you feel very strongly about writing exactly
conforming c++ code, you might want to not use the <foo.h> headers
because they are deprecated:
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/coding-standards.html#faq-27.4

however, since parts of click already depend on having g++, it's
probably not a big deal.


On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 16:53, Eddie Kohler wrote:
> > well, for C++ code it *is* the right thing to do.  because all those 
> > things should live under the std namespace.  the right thing to do (but 
> > a pain in the ass) is to change all standard library stuff to use std:: 
> > in front, or put `using std;' at the top of files.
> > 
> > although i know some people have strong feelings about namespaces...
> 
> Well, the <XXX.h> headers are equally standard in C++. I don't see any
> important difference between
> 
> #include <cstdio>
> using namespace std;
> 
> and
> 
> #include <stdio.h>
> 
> Do you remember if #include <stdio.h> caused problems on some relevant
> platform?
> 
> Eddie
-- 
Douglas S. J. De Couto    decouto at lcs.mit.edu