Re: [cc65] NULL descrepency

From: Andrew J. Kroll <forge1dr.ea.ms>
Date: 2006-04-08 11:18:46
> 
> 
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:11:19PM -0400, Andrew J. Kroll wrote:
> > This way even if you just #include <cc65.h> you get support for all arch's
> > depending on the -t option fed to cc65.... and it won't spew a message saying
> > you can't use a certain header for programs that are arch independant,
> > and it could be an "automatic include" on the commandline as an option
> > so one does not need to alter thier code.
> 
> I don't like that idea because it pollutes the name space and does increase
> compile time. There's a reason, why a C compiler comes with a set of header
> files, instead of just one. Otherwise, it would be common to have
> 
>         #include <iso-c.h>
> 
> which includes stdlib.h, stddef.h string.h stdio.h and whatever.

I ment only for the arch dependent parts, not the whole libc :-)

> > Furtermore, if each .h file was wrapped, it would only get included once.
> > Including a header file more than once can cause errors. It is a nice way
> > to mitagate the problem.
> 
> Each .h that comes with cc65 *IS* wrapped in a #define. If you find one that
> is not wrapped, it is an error and should be reported.
> 

Good to know as I have not looked in depth yet.

Yours,
-- 
Andrew J. Kroll
Software and Hardware Engineer and Consultant
Grafixoft http://dr.ea.ms/HW/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Sat Apr 8 11:18:56 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-04-08 11:18:58 CEST