>>>>> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Perhaps but please look at the actual patch before making Abdelrazak> a decision. I am almost certain that this include is not Abdelrazak> needed at all. So a simpler patch would be to just erase Abdelrazak> them. The code uses SHRT_MAX, so it seems to rely on limits.h. Abdelrazak> "qttableview" in qt3 is some code stolen for Qt2 source Abdelrazak> code, it is not used at all in qt4 (replaced with Abdelrazak> QTableWidget IIRC). Abdelrazak> Keeping a test for something we don't use is wrong IMHO. Abdelrazak> Then, if a need for this is coming back in the future, we Abdelrazak> should use a _portable_ header. Scons or not, this kind of Abdelrazak> cleanup is a good thing IMHO. But I will stop if there is Abdelrazak> resistance to that. I can tell you that when we release a version of LyX that uses limits.h without testing for it, there will be complaints that it does not compile on some unix and _I_ will have to re-add the test. Now, if you find a reasonable way to get rid of the need for the file, it is OK. Replacing limits.h by climits is not. JMarc
