Date:	Sun, 14 May 2000 10:06:01 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	"Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: more gcc issues
In-Reply-To:	<391DF574.6037.367C59@localhost>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000514100008.26827G@is>
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

On Sun, 14 May 2000, Mark E. wrote:

> You don't notice this with the DJGPP ports because Andris leaves those three 
> files out of the DJGPP ports of GCC. Since our goal is for gcc 3.0 to work 
> without changes, we need to find a different solution. 

The ``different solution'' may be to rename the GCC-supplied headers 
before running the configure script.  I'm guessing that there's some
DJGPP-specific script or batch file that is run to configure the 
distribution, where we could put this.

> The main problem is that GCC's headers and our headers don't know when the 
> other has defined a type like 'size_t'.

The GCC headers must be idempotent.  So there should be *some* way of 
knowing that they are included.  If GCC folks don't want to know about 
DJGPP, perhaps DJGPP's headers could know about GCC.

More importantly, I'm not sure I understand what are the reasons for 
forcing the use of GCC headers.  If Andris can solve the problem by
simply not using those headers, it would seem that whatever clever
tricks those headers do, we don't need them, right?  If so, why do GCC 
maintainers are so eager we use them?

> For example, GCC's stddef.h doesn't 
> understand __DJ_size_t and DJGPP's headers don't understand the macros that 
> GCC's stddef.h defines to signal that it defined 'size_t'.

We could make our stddef know about GCC's macros, if that's necessary.

- Raw text -