On Thursday 19 February 2004 03:42 pm, Marc Aurele La France wrote: > First off, 2) doesn't work if <stdbool.h> is #included after > the headers being modified here. True, it's a nasty hack. I should have foreseen this problem as well...but fortunately, the hack worked this time. I imagine I just got lucky. It may also work to #undef bool after the all headers are included as well, but before anything tries to reference ValueUnion.bool. The #undefs I put in there cover the typedef of ValueUnion already. > Secondly (and perhaps more to the point), is that <stdbool.h> > is a very recent (glibc-wise) invention (read: bleeding edge). > So, in your shoes, I'd first talk to the glibc people about > the implications of an stdbool.h in the first place. Not that bleeding edge. stdbool.h is part of gcc and has been around since stock 2.95.3 (possibly earlier as well). 2.95.3 is...downright ancient, at least in software terms. We might possibly have gcc skip the offending stdbool.h contents whenever __STRICT_ANSI__ is defined. I would consider that fairly proper myself, as this is exactly what gcc -ansi is supposed to address. I'll run off to the gcc devs and see if I can make the case there. If we decide to go that route, we'd also have to make sure the relevant parts of XFree86 compile with gcc -ansi. Then this problem might go away entirely, except for not-so-recent gcc compilers. -- Kelledin "If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?" _______________________________________________ XFree86 mailing list XFree86@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
