================ @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +/*===---- dbm.h - BSD header for database management ----------------------===*\ + * + * Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions. + * See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information. + * SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception + * +\*===----------------------------------------------------------------------===*/ + +#if !defined(_AIX) + +#include_next <dbm.h> + +#else + +#define __need_NULL +#include <stddef.h> + +#include_next <dbm.h> + +/* Ensure that the definition of NULL is as expected. */ +#define __need_NULL +#include <stddef.h> ---------------- AaronBallman wrote:
Why is the pattern to define `NULL`, include_next the header the user asked for, and then define `NULL` again? Are the include_next headers defining `NULL` to something different? And if so, what are we potentially breaking by redefining it out from under them? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149176 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
