[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: dfa.c order of include problem

From: Aharon Robbins
Subject: Re: dfa.c order of include problem
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 09:48:35 +0200
User-agent: Heirloom mailx 12.5 6/20/10

The last I'll say on this...

> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:31:52 -0800
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> To: Aharon Robbins <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
> Subject: Re: dfa.c order of include problem
> On 01/31/13 12:24, Aharon Robbins wrote:
> >> Glibc <regex.h> does not have the problem,
> > How is that so?  The undef of RE_DUP_MAX and redefine is there.
> > If limits.h is included after regex.h, then the value from limits.h
> > is applied.
> But in Glibc the two definitions are equivalent (identical preprocessor
> token lists), so it's valid C and there's no problem.

You've missed the point.  Using the glibc regex.h on a non-GLIBC system
where limits.h is included after regex.h does not solve anything.

That is the issue I am working around with the change I suggested to



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]