Sure. One thing we do need to do is document more clearly the intended
include order and some of these subtleties. We hit these ourselves
when preparing the release.

We thought it would make sense for the test files to be written like
user files without dependence on config.h. Unfortunately, our project
is infected with the autotools virus which assumes that downstream
projects will also be using autotools and hence have config.h included
I think. It was impossible to easily remove the dependence on config.h
from the tests. For years people have been assuming it is available.
It's included anyway from tests.h I think, which is required to make
many of the tests work.

But we are kind of stuck with the hackish mess we have forever I think.

Bill.

On 25 November 2012 17:22, Jean-Pierre Flori <jpfl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sunday, November 25, 2012 6:15:49 PM UTC+1, Bill Hart wrote:
>>
>> On 25 November 2012 16:22, Jean-Pierre Flori <jpf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>>
>> > If I understand correctly you'd rather propose to only check for
>> > stdint.h at
>> > build time, define a macro in mpir.h and then use it?
>> > Unless you really want to run with or without stdint.h on similar
>> > hardware
>> > (but I don't think you distribute binaries anyway?)
>>
>> This doesn't work when installing mpir on some systems with multiple
>> compilers. Hence it cannot be done this way.
>>
>> Bill.
>
> Ok, anyway the fix in LinBox is easy to setup so it's no real issue now.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"mpir-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.

Reply via email to