On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> I'm not too happy with the wording either. As I see it, even on MinGW
>> runtime version 4.0 it's not true that "string.h has _only_ inline
>> definition of strcasecmp"; there's also "#define strncasecmp
>> _strnicmp" which effectively provides a non-inline definition of
>> strncasecmp aka _strnicmp.
> I do not get this part. Sure, string.h would have definitions of
> things other than strcasecmp, such as strncasecmp. So what?
Sorry, I mixed up "strcasecmp" and "strncasecmp".
> Does it "effectively" provide a non-inline definition of strcasecmp?
Yes, if __NO_INLINE__ is defined string.h provides non-inline
definition of both "strcasecmp" and "strncasecmp" by defining them to
"_stricmp" and "_strnicmp" respectively.
> Perhaps the real issue is that the header file does not give an
> equivalent "those who want to take the address of strcasecmp will
> get the address of _stricmp instead" macro, e.g.
> #define strcasecmp _stricmp
> or something?
Now it's you who puzzles me, because the header file *does* have
exactly the macro that you suggest.
Anyway, I think Peff's reply to my other mail summed it up nicely. I
will come up with another patch.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html