Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2nd patch Re: [Jade/OpenJade] g++ 2.95 C++ portabilit y problems From: Matthias Clasen <clasen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 21:15:54 +0200 |
Adam said: > > Ugh. Ok. Note that my changes aren't really suitable, i.e., thing > will break again with g++ 2.96 and 3.0 etc. I think we wanna change > the test to check for either gcc >= 2.95 or else base it on GNUlibc > version?? I have looked at all the duplicates which you put into conditionals. Some of them are just plain duplicates and can be removed completely, for the others I think I can analyse under what conditions they are needed. The only thing which needs configure help is the question if size_t == unsigned int. Autoconf has predefined macros for checking the size of types, and it will be enough to check that the two types have the same size (since the only candidates for size_t are unsigned int and unsigned long). -- Matthias Clasen, Tel. 0761/203-5606 Email: clasen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mathematisches Institut, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitaet Freiburg DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [PATCH] 2nd patch Re: [Jade/Ope, Adam Di Carlo | Thread | About usability, Didier PH Martin |
Re: [PATCH] 2nd patch Re: [Jade/Ope, Adam Di Carlo | Date | [no subject], Matthias Clasen |
Month |