Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:38:40 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Holejsovsky, Pavel" <PHolejs AT rkk DOT cz>
cc: "'djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com'" <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: Patch: sentinels for typedefs in headers
In-Reply-To: <103239A3A1D2D3118CF10060973136622D4F31@mail.rkk.cz>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000615113540.11632V-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 Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Holejsovsky, Pavel wrote:

> >> FYI, MSVC6.0 declares 
> >> 
> >> typedef unsigned short wchar_t;
> >> typedef wchar_t wint_t;
> >
> >Really?  Then how do they define WEOF?  It cannot be negative with
> >this setup.
> 
> #ifndef WEOF
> #define WEOF (wint_t)(0xFFFF)
> #endif

Ouch, I hate to mix signed and unsigned!  Unless I'm haunted by the 
shadow of a dwarf here, someone will have to make sure this doesn't break 
our trivial implementation of wide characters (since WEOF starts as EOF).