在 2021-03-27 14:04, sotrdg sotrdg 写道:
This is a joke.
(...)
If you think you can do better without adding any, performance lost and
inconsistency, feel free to
submit pull request.
You do think adding an opaque ptr would prevent me for hacking? I have already hacked not just
GLIBC, but mus
在 2021/3/26 下午7:51, Martin Storsjö 写道:
That also brings up the question about the origin of pointing out this mismatching struct (by
"sotrdg sotrdg" on the list a couple days ago) - was there code that used those fields, noticing
that it didn't do the right thing in UCRT builds? Or just readin
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021, Jacek Caban wrote:
On 26/03/2021 12:22, Martin Storsjö wrote:
As there's no code that could be using the new UCRT spelling using any
public headers, there's nothing we can try to remain compatible with in
that case, so we'd only be setting new predecent (i.e. if building
On 26/03/2021 12:22, Martin Storsjö wrote:
As there's no code that could be using the new UCRT spelling using any
public headers, there's nothing we can try to remain compatible with
in that case, so we'd only be setting new predecent (i.e. if building
with mingw headers, and iff targeting UCR
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021, Liu Hao wrote:
在 2021/3/26 上午4:56, Martin Storsjö 写道:
diff --git a/mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio.h b/mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio.h
(...)
int _flag;
int _file;
These fields have been changed to `long`s in UCRT (although there is no
difference in the representa
在 2021/3/26 上午4:56, Martin Storsjö 写道:
diff --git a/mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio.h b/mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio.h
(...)
int _flag;
int _file;
These fields have been changed to `long`s in UCRT (although there is no difference in the
representation), and `_flag` has been renamed to
Signed-off-by: Martin Storsjö
---
However, in public UCRT headers, this whole struct is opaque, so
just not exposing it could also be an option...
---
mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio.h | 5 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio.h b/mingw-w64-headers/crt/stdio
