Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 10:44:11 +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: <391E94BA.23803.2B0B14@localhost>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000515104325.9209G-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


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

> >From Eli:
> > We could make our stddef know about GCC's macros, if that's necessary.
> 
> and from Laurynas:
> > Can't we just tell DJGPP headers to recognize GCCisms?
> 
> There are definitely options. But they may not want to let their headers 
> recognize DJGPPisms since we can easily change ours unlike other cases where 
> GCC is being installed on a system that already has a system compiler.

IMHO we should try anyway.  It doesn't make sense for GCC maintainers
to tell us to get lost just because we use GCC as the system compiler.
The issue is not the compiler, it's the library.

> Below is the stddef.h that currently comes with 2.96 which should illustrate 
> this.

Note how many system-dependent defines does it have; why should it be
a problem to add some random #ifdef __DJGPP__?

Anyway, what we should IMHO worry about is not stddef.h, it's limits.h
and float.h.