[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] Re: Problem on rs6000-ibm-aix4.3.2.0 (Fortran) -DPIC

From: Guido Draheim
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Problem on rs6000-ibm-aix4.3.2.0 (Fortran) -DPIC
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:36:48 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de-AT; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Boehne, Robert schrieb:
Wouldn't replacing -DPIC with -D__PIC__ break a fundamental
assumption about ANSI compilers, that "__" means compiler-defined
and not in the userspace?

#if (defined(__pic__) || defined(__PIC__)) && !defined(PIC) #define PIC 1 #endif The main problem with removing -DPIC is that there is a backward
compatability issue.  This issue would STILL exist if we renamed
PIC to a sensible name like LT__PIC__, and since compilers provide
this it doesn't seem necessary to keep it at all.

well said - what's it about for compilers that do not define
that __PIC__ define? I did just think it would not hurt to do
a double-define for those that do, and at the same the fact
of the change gets obvious to whoever gets bitten by it.

That's why my plan is to deprecate it for 1.5, and remove it in
a future release.

make a double-define in the next-release? ,-)

reply via email to

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