Felix Buenemann wrote: > Am 27.10.2013 um 16:02 schrieb Bram Moolenaar <b...@moolenaar.net>: > > Björn wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:14 AM, Felix Buenemann wrote: > >>> Am 19.10.2013 um 18:54 schrieb björn: > >>>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Felix Bünemann wrote: > >>>>> Am Mittwoch, 9. Oktober 2013 20:25:49 UTC+2 schrieb björn: > >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Felix Bünemann wrote: > >>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that AvailabilityMacros.h is available on all > >>>>>>> versions of OS > >>>>>>> X, because it's copyright header states 2001-20xx which matches the > >>>>>>> OS X > >>>>>>> 10.0 release timeline. Is the os_mac.h code also targeting OS 9? In > >>>>>>> that > >>>>>>> case we should add a configure check. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, pre-OS X should be supported. If there is a suitable #ifdef > >>>>>> check for that, then it should be possible to submit as a patch to > >>>>>> mainline Vim. > >>>>> > >>>>> OK, I've updated the patch with a configure check: > >>>>> https://gist.github.com/felixbuenemann/6150257 > >>>> > >>>> This looks good to me ... but should we perhaps be checking for > >>>> "Availability.h" instead as that is what is used on Mavericks (and > >>>> earlier OS X versions did not need explicit inclusion of > >>>> AvailabilityMacros.h)? > >>> > >>> The macros used in the vim codebase are defined in AvailabilityMacros.h > >>> not Availability.h. > >>> Availability.h has similar but not the same macros, so using it would > >>> require cluttering the code with even more ifdefs. > >> > >> OK. Well, then I think this solves the problem of compiling on OS X > >> 10.9 neatly and that it could be included in mainline Vim. > >> > >> Bram, can you please consider this patch for inclusion. It should > >> apply cleanly (I just tried myself) and it automatically solves the > >> problem of us having to know exactly when this header was made > >> available. I've pasted it below for your convenience. Note that > >> Felix Bünemann wrote the patch, not me. > > > > Thanks, I'll put it in the todo list. > > > > How about the patch that Kazunobu Kuriyama sent on Friday? > > Both patches should be fine. Mine uses a configure check to see if > AvailabilityMacros.h is available while Kazonubu Kuriyama used some > compiler defines to check if the header is needed, so his solution is > a bit more lightweight.
Just to be clear: So including one or the other works, but I should not include both? -- Dreams are free, but there's a small charge for alterations. /// Bram Moolenaar -- b...@moolenaar.net -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\ an exciting new programming language -- http://www.Zimbu.org /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// -- -- You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_mac" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_mac+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
