On 16 June 2011 04:25, Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 09:32, Martin Sustrik <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Let's drop it unless there's someone with NT3.4 box out there to test it.
>
> Isn't this the kind of thing that shouldn't be done on a stable branch
> (like zeromq2-1 currently)?
>
>
I really would like to find Microsoft's official verdict on _WINSOCKAPI_ and
hence the preferred mechanism for handling *winsock2.h*.  Currently there is
the hack from Microsoft listed previously which is incompatible with *
mingw-w64* as that raises an assertion saying you must manually include
first.

-- 
Steve-o
_______________________________________________
zeromq-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev

Reply via email to