On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Evan Martin<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Ben Laurie<[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'd be happy to do that. When I do, there's something that's already
>> puzzling me, and that's OS_POSIX.
>>
>> I don't have a copy of the POSIX standard, at least not a recent one,
>> so its hard to know what is or isn't POSIX, and I imagine I am not
>> alone in that. However, various comments lead me to believe that
>> OS_POSIX doesn't really mean "POSIX" in people's minds - it really
>> means "UNIXish" or "not Windows" or something.
>>
>> How would I document this define? Is there an agreed meaning?
>
> I think it should just be POSIX.  The places that Linux and the BSDs
> will disagree are exactly the bits that aren't POSIX.  You don't need
> a POSIX spec for this; libc man pages have a "CONFORMING TO" section.

I'm glad there's clear consensus on this issue :-)

So am I right in thinking that your view is that if its in FreeBSD and
Linux it will be POSIX, almost always? And so there is no need for a
UNIXISH macro?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to