>From a quick survey it seems as if most of the uses of LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX are >for turning off POSIX specific features, not turning on Windows specific ones. > LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX seems more appropriate for this that !_WIN32 or whatever. >For instance, if we wanted to port lldb to OpenVMS, we could just keep the >defines as they were and add LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX to the OpenVMS makefile >(though I'm sure it has a POSIX layer of some level of fidelity, but using >that or the native VMS calls would be up to the person who was doing the >port...)
It does seem like we are using POSIX to mean UNIX, so that some UNIX'es that aren't fully POSIX compliant succeed the checks, and then need #ifdef FREEBSD or whatever. Not sure it's worth cleaning this up, however. Jim > On Aug 8, 2014, at 5:43 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Frequently I see checks against LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX, and other times i see > specific OS checks. It seems to me like #if LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX is equivalent > to #if defined(_WIN32). If this is correct, any objection to me marking > LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX as deprecated and slowly changing conditionals over to #if > defined(_WIN32) instead? It's easier for me to reason about and I don't > have to spend time thinking about what other platforms might be affected that > way. > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
