Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-30 Thread Kevin Atkinson
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:01:23AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > On Nov 28, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > How about we simply change the name of the struct to lt_handlerecord > > > or something? > > > > I prefer `s

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-29 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:01:23AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 28, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How about we simply change the name of the struct to lt_handlerecord > > or something? > > I prefer `something' :-) > > How about `typedef struct lt_dlhandle_st

RE: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-29 Thread Bernard Dautrevaux
il: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Bernard Dautrevaux > Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 10:39 AM > To: 'Alexandre Oliva'; Kevin Atkinson > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-29 Thread Bernard Dautrevaux
> -Original Message- > From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 11:53 PM > To: Kevin Atkinson > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Problem with ltdl.h > > > On Nov 28, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 29, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 29 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Nov 28, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > How about we simply change the name of the struct to lt_handlerecord >> > or something? >> >> I prefer `something' :-) >>

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Kevin Atkinson
On 29 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 28, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How about we simply change the name of the struct to lt_handlerecord > > or something? > > I prefer `something' :-) > > How about `typedef struct lt_dlhandle_struct lt_dlhandle'? I wil

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 28, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about we simply change the name of the struct to lt_handlerecord > or something? I prefer `something' :-) How about `typedef struct lt_dlhandle_struct lt_dlhandle'? -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unica

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 08:53:00PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 28, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 28 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > >> On Nov 28, 2000, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > in C++ > >> > struct lt_dlhandle > >> > auto

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 28, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 28 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Nov 28, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > It does NOT appear >> > to be valid C++ code >> >> I've just managed to compile: >> >> typedef struct foo foo; > Yes that will

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Kevin Atkinson
On 28 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 28, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It does NOT appear > > to be valid C++ code > > I've just managed to compile: > > typedef struct foo foo; Yes that will compile but typedef struct foo * foo Won't, which is what the lin

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 28, 2000, Kevin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 28 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Nov 28, 2000, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > in C++ >> >struct lt_dlhandle >> > automatically define a TYPENAME i.e. makes an implicit >> >typedef struct lt_dl

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Kevin Atkinson
On 28 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Nov 28, 2000, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > in C++ > > struct lt_dlhandle > > automatically define a TYPENAME i.e. makes an implicit > > typedef struct lt_dlhandle lt_dlhandle; > > However, IIRC, it is valid to have the i

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Nov 28, 2000, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > in C++ > struct lt_dlhandle > automatically define a TYPENAME i.e. makes an implicit > typedef struct lt_dlhandle lt_dlhandle; However, IIRC, it is valid to have the implicit name overridden by another definition of the

RE: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-28 Thread Bernard Dautrevaux
> -Original Message- > From: Kevin Atkinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 9:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Problem with ltdl.h > > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Kevin Atkinson wrote: > > > > > I just updat

Re: Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-27 Thread Kevin Atkinson
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Kevin Atkinson wrote: > > I just updated to the latest CVS version of libtool and I noticed two > problems. > > 1) Even though I defined LT_NON_POSIX_NAMESPACE I still can't get lt_ptr_t > to work. After looking at the header file I discovered the really is > LT_FUBAR_NAME

Problem with ltdl.h

2000-11-27 Thread Kevin Atkinson
I just updated to the latest CVS version of libtool and I noticed two problems. 1) Even though I defined LT_NON_POSIX_NAMESPACE I still can't get lt_ptr_t to work. After looking at the header file I discovered the really is LT_FUBAR_NAMESPACE. Either the docs or the header files need to be cha