[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX
|
From: |
Paul Eggert |
|
Subject: |
Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX |
|
Date: |
Sun, 28 Jan 2007 23:16:50 -0800 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
> If you're serious about merging back to glibc, it'll help
> (name space cleanliness) to add the "__" prefix: i.e., change
> your Restrict to __Restrict.
But the prefix _R suffices, no? As far as the standard C name space
rules are concerned, _R* is in the same category as __*.
- enforcing the use of string.h related modules, (continued)
- enforcing the use of string.h related modules, Bruno Haible, 2007/01/27
- Re: enforcing the use of string.h related modules, Eric Blake, 2007/01/27
- Re: enforcing the use of string.h related modules, Bruno Haible, 2007/01/31
- Re: enforcing the use of string.h related modules, Eric Blake, 2007/01/31
- Re: enforcing the use of string.h related modules, Bruno Haible, 2007/01/31
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Bob Proulx, 2007/01/27
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Bob Proulx, 2007/01/27
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Jim Meyering, 2007/01/28
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Paul Eggert, 2007/01/28
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Jim Meyering, 2007/01/29
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Jim Meyering, 2007/01/29
- Re: build failures: string.h vs. HP-UX, Paul Eggert, 2007/01/28