On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 18:55 +0200, Mosfet wrote:
> What I wanted to say in my last message was the fact I thought it would be
> more logical to add some missing include and implement them instead of
> adding #ifndef _MINGW32CE everywhere.
[..]
> I was just saying that if you provide a minimal implementation of missing
> posix functions using native API (mingw) it would be easier because it
> wouldn't be necessary to test if errno exists
It is common practice to use a build system generated with automake and
autoconf. When using that, it is very easy to auto-detect the
environment, and then constructions such as
#ifdef HAVE_ERRNO_H
#include <errno.h>
#endif
...
#ifdef HAVE_ERRNO_H
return errno;
#else
return -1;
#endif
are easy.
> But this was just a suggestion/remark and if you tell me it's a bad idea I
> believe you. In this case I will do the modifications to the D sources.
>
> I was asking because recently I have ported ustl(embedded stl) to wince and
> this is what I did, I have declared errno.h, unistd, ... and I have
> provided implementations.
> Then I was able to compile it without any source code modification of ustl.
It may be a good thing for you do do this to port applications, but it
would be a bad thing for us to provide include files for things that we
don't implement.
Danny
--
Danny Backx ; danny.backx - at - scarlet.be ; http://danny.backx.info
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
Cegcc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cegcc-devel
