On Thu, 30 May 2002 03:43:06 +0200, Hrvoje Niksic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ian Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> This is a bit late, > >Sorry it didn't make it in. I guess we could publish it on the web >site, so that people who wish to compile 1.8.2 with Borland C++ can do >so. Heiko's "Wget on Windows" page is another good place to link to >this patch. I'll clean it up a bit. >> +# ifdef NO_ANONYMOUS_STRUCT >> + wt->wintime.u.HighPart = ft.dwHighDateTime; >> + wt->wintime.u.LowPart = ft.dwLowDateTime; >> +# else >> wt->wintime.HighPart = ft.dwHighDateTime; >> wt->wintime.LowPart = ft.dwLowDateTime; >> +# endif > >Isn't anonymous struct a C++ feature? (I'm only guessing here.) Yes, but some C compilers support it as an extension. >Would wt->wintime.u.HighPart work under both compilers? I'm just >asking as someone who would like to see the number of #ifdefs decrease >rather than increase. Microsoft only document the anonymous form in their Win32 SDK, which is why I'm hesitant to take it out altogether. However, the undocumented, non-anonymous "u." form does seem to work uniformly, at least with the Microsoft, Borland and Watcom compilers I've tried.
