HI Peter,
Peter Bex writes:
> This seems like a good idea. However, could you also swap the two
> code blocks? A double negation (#ifndef NO_...) can be confusing, and
> by making it read "#ifdef NO_POSIX_POLL" (I'd probably drop the
> HAVE_ prefix, as that's more idiomatic AFAICT), it becomes
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 06:10:46PM +0200, Moritz Heidkamp wrote:
> The attached patch is a follow-up to my previous patch (the one which
> enables poll(2) on Android). It inverts the HAVE_POSIX_POLL flag to
> HAVE_NO_POSIX_POLL which only needs to be set when poll(2) is *not*
> available rather tha
The attached patch is a follow-up to my previous patch (the one which
enables poll(2) on Android). It inverts the HAVE_POSIX_POLL flag to
HAVE_NO_POSIX_POLL which only needs to be set when poll(2) is *not*
available rather than the other way around. The purpose is to make the
safe choice the defaul
