[GiNaC-list] about CLN versus win32 patch
varg at theor.jinr.ru
Thu Jul 20 03:43:38 CEST 2006
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 11:09:13PM +0200, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> I wasn't aware of you having such a patch. Have you ever sent it to me?
I've posted something very similar to CLN list (in reply to MinGW user
who could not compile CLN).
> But before commiting this, let me ask: is the handling of preprocessor
> macros really correct?
The original code treats system with
(defined (_WIN32) && defined (__GNUC__))
as an ordinary *NIX. But this assumption is wrong (e.g. MinGW defines
both _WIN32 and __GNUC__, but has no <unistd.h> and getpid()), and
checking for __CYGWIN__ would be more appropirate.
> In particular I'm wondering about your removal of one #if defined(__CYGWIN__)
> in another place.
The original version does not contain check for defined(__CYGWIN__) at
$ grep src/base/random/cl_random_from.cc.bak -e '__CYGWIN__'
> I'm going to check this in to CVS ASAP if you can confirm that this
> won't break anything.
I've tested the patch under GNU/Linux and ReactOS. It should work on
*NIXes (the patch does not change *NIX-specific code) and Cygwin
(because CYGWIN is treated as *NIX, as in the original version). That
said, I have *not* tested my patch on Cygwin. And I won't be able
to do this in near future...
All science is either physics or stamp collecting.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://www.cebix.net/pipermail/ginac-list/attachments/20060720/92420daf/attachment.pgp
More information about the GiNaC-list