Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ouch. They actually expect you to be able to do anything useful without
the other headers?
It might actually be easier to just implement the headers ourselves on
platforms that don't have them...
The provisions for free-standing implementations in the C
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
5- Other misc includes that should be wrapped in ifdefs are:
sys/types.h, sys/stat.h, fcntl.h (btw parrot.h includes fcntl.h
twice, once inside an ifdef and then by default).
What platform doesn't have sys/types.h? It's one of the few headers
You may be interested in the lib_deps target.
--Josh
At 0:49 on 03/31/2002 EST, Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did some browsing of the code for potential problems in compiling
for embedded platforms and/or general porting and here are some of the
things I found.
1- assert.h and
At 09:56 PM 3/30/2002 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Melvin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
5- Other misc includes that should be wrapped in ifdefs are:
sys/types.h, sys/stat.h, fcntl.h (btw parrot.h includes fcntl.h
twice, once inside an ifdef and then by default).
What platform
On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 12:49:08AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
I did some browsing of the code for potential problems in compiling
for embedded platforms and/or general porting and here are some of the
things I found.
Do embedded C compilers often not conform to ANSI C 89?
1- assert.h and
At 01:06 AM 3/31/2002 -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 12:49:08AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
I did some browsing of the code for potential problems in compiling
for embedded platforms and/or general porting and here are some of the
things I found.
Do embedded C
Melvin Smith:
# At 01:06 AM 3/31/2002 -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
# On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 12:49:08AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
# I did some browsing of the code for potential problems in
# compiling
# for embedded platforms and/or general porting and here
# are some of the
# things I
At 10:56 PM 3/30/2002 -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
Melvin Smith:
# At 01:06 AM 3/31/2002 -0500, Michael G Schwern wrote:
# On Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 12:49:08AM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
Ouch. They actually expect you to be able to do anything useful without
the other headers?
Grin, I agree -- go ask
