On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:49:56AM -0700, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> the c++ standard could be more explicit about this incompatibility
> with c: it states the requirement in a note for the <cname> headers
> and then defines the semantics for the <name.h> headers in terms of
> the <cname> one

Sad, but true.  I wish it was stated better.

 > The only way to achieve equivalent inline behavior in C++ is to
 > provide a definition as an extern inline function.

Seems to be true, so newlib and glibc have checks for __cplusplus define.
Alternative would be to provide 26 fake headers containing #include_next
directive, but it's not very portable solution.

Attached is the patch, which simply adds #ifndef __cplusplus around
macros.  At the end, it seems to be the right thing to do, although the
way it's defined is rather confusing.

Thanks,
Sergey