Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 21:13:22 +0200 Message-Id: <200007181913.VAA01170@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de> From: "Martin v. Loewis" To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il CC: lauras AT softhome DOT net, mrs AT windriver DOT com, gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <200007180918.FAA06988@indy.delorie.com> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Tue, 18 Jul 2000 05:18:06 -0400 (EDT)) Subject: Re: GCC headers and DJGPP port References: <200007180918 DOT FAA06988 AT indy DOT delorie DOT com> User-Agent: SEMI/1.13.3 (Komaiko) FLIM/1.12.5 (Hirahata) Emacs/20.4 (i586-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/4.0 (HANANOEN) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.13.3 - "Komaiko") 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 > Is __null a builtin in the C compiler? Not in the C compiler, only in the C++ compiler > Anyway, one reason that __null might cause trouble is that it breaks > previous versions of the library which were compiled with different > definition of NULL. I think we've been discussing that on the DJGPP > developers list to death. And did these discussions come to a conclusion, or did everybody die before that? If there was a conclusion, can you summarize why __null might break previous versions of the library? > > + #undef SIZE_TYPE > > + #define SIZE_TYPE "long unsigned int" > > Do I understand correctly that this should go into GCC distribution? Yes, in the target header files. > If so, I don't think I mind too much. It does introduce a dependency > between the library and the compiler, which is unfortunate. I think > we need to discuss this on the DJGPP devlopers' list. It doesn't introduce the dependency, the dependency is already there. Regards, Martin