On 21 Nov, 2007, at 10:50 , Tom Lane wrote:
Brandon Maust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On 21 Nov, 2007, at 08:39 , Tom Lane wrote:
Seems the question is not so much about OS X as it is about what
perl you're using ...
it's 5.8.8, as provided by apple (same for gcc, etc):
perl on OS X does look to be constitutively defining a 'bool' as
_Bool
via gcc's stdbool.h, so perhaps this is more of a compiler issue?
No, because I see the identical content in stdbool.h on OS X 10.4
(perl 5.8.6) and it is not causing a problem here. Apparently 5.8.8
is sucking stdbool.h into the compile where 5.8.6 did not. Can you
track down just what the inclusion path is?
yes, it is sucking it in (via handy.h), at least in 10.5:
/* XXX Configure ought to have a test for a boolean type, if I can
just figure out all the headers such a test needs.
Andy Dougherty August 1996
*/
/* bool is built-in for g++-2.6.3 and later, which might be used
for extensions. <_G_config.h> defines _G_HAVE_BOOL, but we can't
be sure _G_config.h will be included before this file. _G_config.h
also defines _G_HAVE_BOOL for both gcc and g++, but only g++
actually has bool. Hence, _G_HAVE_BOOL is pretty useless for us.
g++ can be identified by __GNUG__.
Andy Dougherty February 2000
*/
#if 1 /* always on Mac OS X */
# include <stdbool.h>
# ifndef HAS_BOOL
# define HAS_BOOL 1
# endif
#endif
I'm tempted to fix this with
#ifdef bool
#undef bool
#endif
in plperl.h after pulling in the Perl headers. However, it's not
clear
to me why you aren't seeing warnings about "false" and "true" getting
redefined, if stdbool.h is really getting included.
For reference, the interesting part of stdbool.h on 10.4 looks like
#define false 0
#define true 1
#define bool _Bool
#if __STDC_VERSION__ < 199901L && __GNUC__ < 3
typedef int _Bool;
#endif
Since this is gcc 3, I suppose that the typedef isn't being used here
but must get supplied internally by the compiler...
stdbool.h looks the same in 10.5.
--
Brandon
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
