Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> writes:
> Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:

>> Practically speaking, I suspect that you'll improve portability to
>> systems that people actually care about by not worrying about
>> strings.h at all and not even trying to include it.  I think we've
>> now reached the point where it's more likely that an OS will provide
>> a broken strings.h out of a misguided sense of backwards
>> compatibility than that someone will really want to build new
>> software on SunOS.

> I think that <strings.h> is still the only header in which POSIX
> declares ffs(), strcasecmp(), and strncasecmp().  That's a reasonable
> reason to #include <strings.h>, although Konstantin may not need those
> functions anyhow.

Huh.  I've never seen a system that didn't declare strcasecmp() and
strncasecmp() in string.h.  But indeed, that's what POSIX documents.

Thanks!  I didn't realize that.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([email protected])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

Reply via email to