Thread: conflict in FILE and stdio

Hello everyone,


I am porting a legacy program from other platform to Linux. I am using Red Hat Linux Enterprise 4. In the legacy program, there is a macro definition,

Code:

#define __FILE FILE

in the legacy program, __FILE will be used in all the places to stands for FILE.

Here is the program to reproduce this issue and the error message from compile, what is the most efficient way to solve this issue? Looking for your advice.

Code:

#define __FILE FILE
#include <stdio.h>

int main (int argc, char** argv)
{
    return 0;
}

[root@localhost test_stdio]# gcc -g -O0 -c foo.c
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:72,
                 from foo.c:2:
/usr/include/libio.h:267: error: redefinition of `struct _IO_FILE'

thanks in advance,
George

Thanks Salem,

Originally Posted by Salem

Well anything beginning with _ (with few exceptions) is a reserved name for the system, so you should not be using it for your own purposes.

I'd say you've managed to find a prior use of __FILE.

I have tried to put #define after #include, and there is no compile error.

I am very interested to learn how compiler works internally. Why put #define after #include <stdio.h> works? Why put it before will cause conflict (redefinition) -- what data types are redefined?

In stdio.h, there is no data type called __FILE. Any ideas? :-)


regards,
George

Thanks Dave,

Originally Posted by Dave Evans

Been there; done that! (And the Boss told me not to change anything; just recompile.)

What happens if you do it as follows?

Code:

#include <stdio.h>
#define __FILE FILE

More importantly: Do you have a test plan to verify the stuff after you get it to recompile? Getting it 99% correct usually isn't good enough.

D.

Put #define after #include works. But I do not know why put #define before #include will have compile error, since I can not find data type __FILE in stdio.h, why compiler says it is redefined?


regards,
George

Hi matsp,


I can not find any __FILE in libio.h. I have attached my libio.h file from /usr/include, could you help check please? Thanks.


regards,
George

Originally Posted by matsp

Are you sayingt hat stdio.h doesn't contain __FILE or that NONE of the files included by stdio.h contains __FILE? Most gcc header files I've seen will include a bunch of other header files that include further more header files, so one include may well drag in a dozen other files that in turn drag in half a dozen files each, so now you have approximately 70 files that you could have a conflict in.

Pay particular attention to:
/usr/include/libio.h


It is quite clear that there is something that DOES contain __FILE inside your header-files, otherwise the alternative position wouldn't work.

Note that __ something is defined as "implementation specific", and it's quite possiblet that there are things that

Since a #define is only in use AFTER it is present in the file, it works to replace it later on in after the header file (because YOU are not using __FILE, but the internals of the file IO library does).

--
Mats

Thanks Dave,


I fully agree with you. I am just interested to learn why there is data type redefinition error, since there is no __FILE in both stdio.h and libio.h. I have attached libio.h in my previous post, could you help to have a look please?


regards,
George

Originally Posted by Dave Evans

By "works", I assume you mean that the compiler no longer chokes. In my experience, that may or may not mean that the functionality is preserved. I stand by my comment about the importance of a test plan.

You might find that this little thing about __FILE is a problem with some versions of gcc and not with others. For the ones that give problems, there is, I believe, a very long convoluted chain of #include and #ifdef and #ifndef and #undef statements that I have never followed to the bitter end.

From my point of view, the preferred approach would be to find all places the legacy code where __FILE is #defined and then comment out the #define statements. Find all files in the legacy code that use __FILE and replace __FILE with FILE. (Instead of a sed script or some such simple thing, you might have to look at each instance and try to figure if something "funny" is going on there that required __FILE to be something "special".)

As matsp mentioned and salem almost mentioned, identifiers that begin with two underscores are supposed to be reserved for the implementation (the compiler writers), so the legacy code did a Bad Thing.

To be precise, from the C standard: "All identifiers that begin with an underscore and either an uppercase letter or another underscore are always reserved for any use."

Violations like this are not unheard of.

The problem is when the Boss thinks that, since the legacy code works (and has been working since 1979), that porting to another operating system and/or compiler is a "slam dunk" and orders you to do the deed "without any big changes," and to have it ready by Tuesday.

D.

Originally Posted by Salem

Well anything beginning with _ (with few exceptions) is a reserved name for the system, so you should not be using it for your own purposes.

He's not "using it," he's porting code.

Thanks zacs7,

Originally Posted by zacs7

Why don't you do something like

Code:

#ifndef __FILE
#define __FILE FILE
#endif

Or undefine it if it was defined... But you'd still be assuming that __FILE is the same as FILE.

I have found this line. It is my carelessness.

I think the cause of compile error is we define something before typedef, then typedef the same thing -- __FILE. Is that correct?

So the correct behavior is to define a datatype after typedef (typedef is real data type definition). Is that correct?

I am interested to learn how compiler treat this internally.


regards,
George

Yes, brewbuck. I am thinking why compiler has such error.

Originally Posted by brewbuck

He's not "using it," he's porting code.

regards,
George

Thanks Mats,

Originally Posted by matsp

Code:

#define name(x) __ ## #x
 
name(FILE) a;

will make __FILE a;

Mats

What is the relationship between the above code and my question? I can not find how to use the above code to find where __FILE is defined? Any comments?


regards,
George