Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/02/02/13:42:08
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:30:43PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Feb 2 13:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 06:49:42PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >On Feb 2 12:20, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 03:20:01PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >> > #if defined (__CYGWIN__) && !defined (__CYGWIN_USE_BIG_TYPES__)
>> >> > #define __pw_uid_t int
>> >> > #endif
>> >> > #ifndef __pw_uid_t
>> >> > #define __pw_uid_t uid_t;
>> >> > #endif
>> >> >
>> >> > struct passwd {
>> >> > char *pw_name;
>> >> > char *pw_passwd;
>> >> > __pw_uid_t pw_uid;
>> >> > __pw_gid_t pw_gid;
>> >> > [etc].
>> >> >
>> >> >Would that be ok, Jeff?
>> >>
>> >> Why not just make __pw_uid_t a typedef?
>> >
>> >Defined where?
>>
>> In pwd.h:
>>
>> #ifndef __CYGWIN__ || !defined(__CYGWIN_USE_BIG_TYPES__)
>> typedef int __pw_uid_t;
>> #else
>> typedef uid_t __pw_uid_t;
>> endif
>
>Fine with me. I don't see a difference, though. What's the advantage
>of having another type?
It's a preference. I don't like using defines for types. OTOH, you could
use a #undef after #define'ing the __pwd_uid_t and then there would be
no subsequent namespace bloat.
So, actually, nevermind. I think I'd prefer a #define followed by a #undef
for that reason.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -