Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/01/12/17:20:48
At 19.24 1998-01-12 +0200, you wrote:
>
>On Mon, 12 Jan 1998, Peter Palotas wrote:
>> If not, how would I go about to make my program which
>> uses getopt to be ANSI compliant? Would it be a good idea, simply to
>> include the GNU getopt.c and getopt.h files?
>
>Yes, but: (1) using GNU `getopt' makes your program GPL; and (2) nobody
>said that GNU getopt sources are strict ANSI (I think they are not).
(1)My program will be GPL anyway, so that is of no concern.
(2)How would I make sure that they are ANSI? Is there some program out
there which can find out wether a program is ANSI or not? By the way, the
GNU `getopt' compiles fine with -ansi -pedantic, but this isn't bulletproof
I guess.
>The best alternative would be to roll your own version, but it's a lot of
>work...
Yeah, I don't feel like reinventing the wheel today.
>> Wouldn't there be a conflict when linking since getopt is included in
>> the C library somewhere as I've understood it!?
>
>Of course, there will be no conflict. Otherwise, how would we be able to
>link all the GNU packages that use their `getopt'?
>
>Since getopt.o (fgrom GNU) is mentioned on the link command line *before*
>libc.a, it gets linked instead of the DJGPP version. And the interface
>is compatible, so no conflict here.
The interface is compatible? What do you mean by that? As far as I know,
most compilers complain if the same symbol is defined twice no matter where
it is put on the commandline, isn't it so in this case?
-- Peter Palotas alias Blizzar -- blizzar AT hem1 DOT passagen DOT se --
*****************************************************
* A brief description of DJGPP: *
* NEVER BEFORE HAS SO FEW DONE SO MUCH FOR SO MANY! *
*****************************************************
- Raw text -