[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GTK patches part 2
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: GTK patches part 2 |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:05:13 +0200 (IST) |
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Eric Gillespie wrote:
> In another post, Jan reveals why the stdio.h problem was not
> obvious until i tried to build: s/gnu-linux.h includes stdio.h.
> This sort of thing is bound to happen again in the future, which
> is why i suggest that it is better to include the headers you
> need, rather than relying on system-dependent header files to do
> it for you.
FWIW, I agree. I didn't check in this particular case, but I'm guessing
that s/gnu-linux.h included stdio.h because it used something from that
header. Other system-dependent headers might not do that. Including
stdio.h in each of the *.c files that use stdio will thus prevent
compilation problems on some platforms.
- GTK patches part 2, (continued)
- GTK patches part 2, Jan D., 2002/12/08
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Eric Gillespie, 2002/12/09
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Jan D., 2002/12/10
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Eric Gillespie, 2002/12/10
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Jan D., 2002/12/10
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Eric Gillespie, 2002/12/10
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Jan D., 2002/12/10
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Eric Gillespie, 2002/12/10
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Richard Stallman, 2002/12/11
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Eric Gillespie, 2002/12/11
- Re: GTK patches part 2,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Jan D., 2002/12/11
- Re: GTK patches part 2, Richard Stallman, 2002/12/11