On 2011-12-07 15:31 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 07 December 2011 14:10:27 Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Dec 2011, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > >> C++ compilers do not get these definition from stdint.h unless > > >> __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS is defined, the macros are in C99 and later, but > > >> were not in the C++ standard of the day (I don't know if they're in > > >> later C++ standards), so aren't defined for C++ compilers by > > >> default. > > > > > > I still don't understand the details of the autoconf problem (and I > > > still think that something is fishy), but defining this macro works > > > just fine :-) > > > > Clearly, depending on an implementation-dependent macro is not > > suitable for portable software. > > i thought __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS was part of the spec and thus not > "implementation dependent" ? Sort-of. It is included non-normatively in the C specification as a recommendation to C++ implementations. C++98 didn't include these macros at all, and thus had nothing to say on the subject. Nevertheless, the latest revision of the C++ specification includes these macros, and explicitly states that you do *not* need to define __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS to get them. Cheers, -- Nick Bowler, Elliptic Technologies (http://www.elliptictech.com/) _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
