[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: what happened to HAVE_STDBOOL_H

From: Sam Steingold
Subject: Re: what happened to HAVE_STDBOOL_H
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 18:34:33 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

> * Eric Blake <address@hidden> [2011-05-03 16:03:16 -0600]:
> On 05/03/2011 03:52 PM, Sam Steingold wrote:
>> when I regenerate config.h with the current gnulib, I get:
>> @@ -871,12 +979,6 @@
>>  /* `struct sockaddr_un' from <sys/un.h> has a `sun_len' field */
>> -/* Define to 1 if stdbool.h conforms to C99. */
>> -#undef HAVE_STDBOOL_H
>> -
>> -/* Define to 1 if you have the <stddef.h> header file. */
>> -#undef HAVE_STDDEF_H
>> -
>>  /* Define to 1 if you have the <stdint.h> header file. */
>>  #undef HAVE_STDINT_H
>> what happenned? are we assuming that all platforms now have these files?
> <stddef.h> is required by C89, so yes, it was a redundant declaration.
> <stdbool.h> is not required by C89.  However, nothing else in gnulib
> used the results of the test, and the idea is that if you are using
> gnulib's stdbool module, you don't care about a fully
> standards-compliant <stdbool.h>, rather you care about the subset of
> <stdbool.h> guaranteed by gnulib.  So we trimmed the size of config.h
> for the sake of emacs:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2011-01/msg00571.html

So, how do I know if gnulib created the file or not?
(if you must know, in clisp we create a header clisp.h for external
modules to include and it either includes the generated "stdbool.h"
literally or does "#include <stdbool.h>"; we used HAVE_STDBOOL_H to
decide what to do).


Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on CentOS release 5.6 (Final) X 
http://truepeace.org http://pmw.org.il http://iris.org.il http://jihadwatch.org
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/tap12009/ http://openvotingconsortium.org
A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't broken.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]