On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Charles Mills <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry, yes, that is what I meant. Cut-and-pasted the wrong line from the > source file. Correct paste follows: > > #define _OPEN_SYS_UNLOCKED_EXT 1 > very odd ... I looked in sys1.cee.sceeh.h(stdio) and found _OPEN_SYS_UNLOCKED_EXT. It seems to be controlling the visibilty of fwrite_unlocked. However, fwrite_unlocked is wrapped in a macro called __new410A that I'm not familiar with. Not sure what impact that has. > Charles > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Sam Siegel > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 11:08 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Any clues on fwrite_unlocked() > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Charles Mills <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Anyone using fwrite_unlocked() successfully? Per TFM I have > > > > #define _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED 1 > > > > I think the following define is required prior to including stdio.h > > #define _OPEN_SYS_UNLOCKED_EXT 1 > > Sam > > > > > > ahead of any #includes (including stdio.h, of course). > > > > Still, I am getting > > > > CCN5274 (S) The name lookup for "fwrite_unlocked" did not find a > > declaration. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
