On May 24, 2009, at 6:40 PM, Duane Ellis wrote:
That is the other question: stdint.h is a C99 header, yes? It might be better to unconditionally included it, defining our short types from it.What do you think?We already do, it is included by 'types.h'. I am saying that *IF* for some bizzaro reason, some platform does not have it we can "fake it" and make the names workAs far as I know - all platforms are GCC, and ALL platforms have STDINTright now. We *only* build with GCC, and no other compiler.(Rick may point out something about the Mac, but I am fairly certain itwill have stdint.h)
I'm going to "that guy" for the foreseeable future, aren't I? For 10.5.x (aka Leopard), it's GCC 4.2 which can be run in C89 or C99 mode with or without GNU extensions. It is extremely likely that Apple will be including LLVM's clang in the future. clang is also C99 compliant. The various headers are actually not a part of the compiler, but of the runtime (i.e. OS). OS X has had a C99-compliant runtime for quite a while.
-Duane. _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
-- Rick Altherr kc8...@kc8apf.net"He said he hadn't had a byte in three days. I had a short, so I split it with him."
-- Unsigned
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
