From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10206081956.AA19308@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	djtypes.h comment
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 8 Jun 2002 14:56:21 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To:	<3D01CDE4.30E5FE49@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Jun 08, 2002 10:27:00 AM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Andris Pavenis wrote:
> [snip]
> > Our latest experience with gcc-3.1 shows that comment in CVS version of
> > include/sys/djtypes.h is not completely correct. Perhaps we should keep
> > only the first line of it (also for update of v2.03)
> > 
> > --- djgpp/include/sys/djtypes.h~3       Sun Jan 27 01:15:41 2002
> > +++ djgpp/include/sys/djtypes.h Mon Jun  3 09:30:14 2002
> > @@ -17,8 +17,6 @@
> >  #define __DJ_uid_t     typedef int uid_t;
> > 
> >  /* For GCC 3.00 or later we use its builtin va_list. */
> > -/* In most cases these definitions won't be used, because headers provided */
> > -/* by GCC hide them. But we can DTRT if GCC headers are missing. */
> >  #if __GNUC__ >= 3
> >  #define __DJ_va_list    typedef __builtin_va_list va_list;
> >  #else
> 
> I think that we could remove these lines too. I think the comment is a bit
> confusing.
> 
> Bye, Rich =]

Seems like a reasonable thing to do; I'll do this for the refresh++

- Raw text -