> No. It's also wrong. Above constants may change in the future.
> I want to add this ugly hack only for compilers used on given
> system if it's strictly necessary and someone verified correct
> value for CRTSCTS.
> So far we have only one such compiler. It's OpenWatcom on Linux so
> I want to make:
>
> HB_FUNC( __TP_CTRLCTS )
> {
> #if !defined( CRTSCTS )
> # if defined( HB_OS_LINUX ) && defined( __WATCOMC__ )
> # define CRTSCTS 020000000000
> # endif
> #endif
>
> #if !defined( CRTSCTS )
> int iTODO;
> hb_retni( 0 );
> #else
> struct termios options;
> int port = hb_parnl( 1 );
> int newvalue = hb_pcount() == 2 ? hb_parnl( 2 ) : -1;
> int curvalue;
> int rc;
>
> tcgetattr( port, &options );
> curvalue = ( options.c_cflag & CRTSCTS ) == CRTSCTS;
>
> if( newvalue == 0 )
> options.c_cflag &= ~CRTSCTS;
> else if( newvalue == 1 )
> options.c_cflag |= CRTSCTS;
>
> if( newvalue >= 0 )
> rc = tcsetattr( port, TCSAFLUSH, &options );
>
> hb_retni( curvalue ? 1 : 0 );
> #endif
> }
>
> if someone will find other compiler which also needs this hack
> or compiler where CRTSCTS is enum type not macro then I expect
> that seeing iTODO warning message he will update the code to
> work well with given system and C compiler and only for this
> system and C compiler. I.e. if CRTSCTS is enum type in OS XXX
> and compiler YYY then he can change the code to:
>
> #if !defined( CRTSCTS )
> # if defined( HB_OS_LINUX ) && defined( __WATCOMC__ )
> # define CRTSCTS 020000000000
> # elif defined( HB_OS_XXX ) && defined( __YYY__ )
> # define CRTSCTS CRTSCTS
> # endif
> #endif
>
> or if he verify that low level CRTL code support CRTSCTS flow
> control and exact value NNN is necessary to activate then he
> will make:
>
> #if !defined( CRTSCTS )
> # if defined( HB_OS_LINUX ) && defined( __WATCOMC__ )
> # define CRTSCTS 020000000000
> # elif defined( HB_OS_XXX ) && defined( __YYY__ )
> # define CRTSCTS NNN
> # endif
> #endif
>
> Otherwise he should leave iTODO warning which quite nicely informs
> all developers at compile time that such functionality does not
> exists in given build. Maybe it will be possible to add it in the
> future if someone will know that it's a problem.
> Now you simply pacified potential compile time error or warning
> on all existing platforms so we do not hear about the problem
> until some user will be clever enough to make deeper test and
> check that some type of flow control does not work as expected
> (probably it's to complicated for most of Harbour users) so
> it's possible that real problem hidden by above modification
> will never be fixed.
>
> BTW It will be also nice that he will leave some note about system
> or C compiler version he used so in the future we can remove
> support for older versions or add additional protection, i.e.:
> # if defined( HB_OS_LINUX ) && defined( __WATCOMC__ ) && \
> __WATCOMC__ < 1290
I'm leaving this to you as it obviously has no point for
me to update it while I don't understand a single bit about it.
I can restore original state but that won't help on the
original problem.
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
[email protected]
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
