From: Charles Krug Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Missing header! Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 10:43:17 -0500 Organization: Pentek Corporation Lines: 37 Message-ID: <36C05795.2A50A07A@mail.pentek.com> References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 32 DOT 19990209090507 DOT 008a7c90 AT pop DOT netaddress DOT com> NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.pentek.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Paul Derbyshire wrote: > I don't seem to have "limits" in $DJDIR$/lang/cxx. It must be missing from > the lgp281b distribution I have. If you mean (the c language file) it's there, and called climits. If you mean the c++ standard file which contains the numeric_limits template class, then no. It isn't part of the distribution for gcc 2.81. I don't believe that it's part of gcc, at least I don't see it in the Solaris port I use here. I have a that I hacked together, but it's incomplete. Particularly, the information for long double is wrong, since I took it from MSVC++. MSVC++ only uses 64-bit values for long double, instead of djgpp's 80-bit values. I got some additional information from an old version of QuickC for DOS that used 80-bit long doubles, but I haven't incorporated it yet. And I have no values for the long double versions of INF and NaN. If you're interested, send me an email and I'll send it to you. It works well enough for my purposes, but it's not ready for distribution, IMO. And I really need to check with the developers of gcc to find out why they didn't include it--assuming the reason goes beyond the obvious name conflict introduced by the GNU header file convention. Charles -- Charles Krug, Jr. Application Engineer Pentek Corp 1 Park Way Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458