Martin Storsjö <mar...@martin.st> writes: > On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Diego Biurrun wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:06:08AM -0400, Derek Buitenhuis wrote: >>> On 15/08/2012 1:21 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >>>>> Why not something a bit more windows-specific like _doserrno? >>>> >>>> Yeah, sounds like a good idea. >>>> >>>>>> and snprintf as a check for mingw? >>>>> >>>>> Don't we already have mingw awareness? >>>> >>>> Derek, do you think that will work? I think this sounds like a good >>>> approach. >>> >>> After some discussion on IRC, it seems like we will wait >>> until non-MinGW Windows (MSVC) has its own target-os in >>> configure. >>> >>> Perhaps we push strtod() and and pals, leaving them unused >>> until configure support gets added? >> >> I'm against more replacement functions getting added to libav. >> We already have too many of them and they should all get killed. > > Yes, I guess nobody likes adding them, but the benefit of being able > to support a widely popular (like it or not) development environment > would IMO outweigh the small burden of carrying them. IMO, the > replacement functions do not obstruct the normal development work > much.
I'm afraid you're underestimating the size of the burden. > Especially in this case, since everybody else seem to have agreed on a > solution, can you please still consider accepting this one? You > opinion is sincerely noted though. For what it's worth, I'm with Diego on this one. -- Måns Rullgård m...@mansr.com _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
