Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 13:25:59 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Vik Heyndrickx <Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
cc: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: NULL redefined! :(
In-Reply-To: <351B831A.68B7@rug.ac.be>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980329132539.14969J-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:

> > Yes.  It's a good reason to fix the C++ library.  
> 
> It isn't broken.
> It only defines NULL when no included library defines NULL. When this
> header inclusion comes before the standard header inclusion, that
> standard header (here <stdlib.h>) will redefine NULL with of course a
> definition of its own, and this will produce this compiler warning. Only
> putting that standard header before the third party header will us get
> rid of that warning, since the third party header won't redefine NULL in
> this case.

IMHO, it is not nice to tell people to put their headers in some
particular order.  I think we will be flooded by messages which refer
to this problem if it doesn't get fixed somehow.  If the concensus is
that we want libstdc++ maintainers to fix their headers, let us
complain to them, the sooner the better.

However, if nobody else cares, I'm willing to drop the subject, as I
don't use C++ too much.