X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f405:: with SMTP id z5-v6mr436994wma.1.1532640680226; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:31:20 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Hans-Bernhard_Br=c3=b6ker?= Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Missing definitions of u_char, u_short and alikes. Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 23:31:12 +0200 Lines: 31 Message-ID: References: <5B5A2FBD DOT 40408 AT gmx DOT de> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: news.dfncis.de 5PvgXcA+QtLW64L0JAPs0QApkSGV9rl/wof4Lo9y7iKf8HqpBB4Z0DTCpc Cancel-Lock: sha1:cdOlrAkIPHtMgqOF8QvZJzusm8g= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 In-Reply-To: <5B5A2FBD.40408@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: de-DE Bytes: 2208 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk Am 26.07.2018 um 22:31 schrieb Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]: > Is there a reason why no header provides definitions for u_short, u_char > and alikes? My personal answer to that would be: because there's no sane reason for them to be in there. In other words: they're not "missing" --- they're just not there. > I am aware that they are not ANSI ... nor any other standard, either. POSIX apprently did mention them in an early version, but only to declare them "obsolete" explicitly. > but these definitions are usually provided in I wouldn't jump to that conclusion quite so quickly. > linux and bsd systems I looks like Linux only has them only as a BSD compatibility feature, which can be turned off freely (see "man features"). > and required to compile certain applications. Then the burden is on those applications to make sure the outdated stuff they still rely on gets defined as part of the configuration process. That's what it's there for. I mean, come on: GNU autoconf and the C99 have a combined age of almost 50 years now. Time to get with the program.