Pavel Vozenilek wrote:
"Gennaro Prota" wrote:
__PRETTY_FUNCTION__ doesn't work, just tried.
If what is said here is true:
http://www.digitalmars.com/archives/cplusplus/3997.html
then the macro is quite unreliable (like the compiler, anyway). This other page:
__FUNCTION__ looks working. A bug report for __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ has been sent.
What do you mean by "working"? Does __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ not work? 'Cause I already committed your suggestion to enable it. :-) If by "working" you mean that #ifdef works, this is not guaranteed (unless DMC specifically documents it to work, of course). __func__ and equivalents aren't required to be macros. They are required to be "predefined identifiers" that name a character string, not necessarily a literal. C99 says: The identifier __func__ shall be implicitly declared by the translator as if, immediately following the opening brace of each function definition, the declaration static const char __func__[] = "function-name"; appeared, where function-name is the name of the lexically-enclosing function.