> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:40:08 -0700 > From: Eric Blake <[email protected]> > CC: Paul Eggert <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], > [email protected] > > Can you assume that emacs will always be built with gcc on Windows, or > are there people that insist on building with a non-free compiler?
If I could assume GCC, the problem wouldn't have existed. There are a couple of contributors (one of them I mentioned in my previous mail) who still use MSVC. For now, I don't want to drop MSVC support, which is why I want to avoid any *.in.h files that require include_next on Windows. Of course, if using include_next will become a necessity (e.g., when gnulib's strftime is imported to Emacs, as Paul promised), and MSVC users won't be able to suggest something to replace it, then we will have no choice but drop MSVC support. > #include_next is supported by gcc, so the question boils down to one of > how many compilers you are trying to support (and whether those other > compilers also have either #include_next or something else that > functions the same and can still be #ifdef/#Pragma'd into the header). I searched on the Internet and didn't find any MSVC equivalent of include_next, but maybe I missed something.
