On Monday 25 June 2012, you wrote: > Hi Groepaz, > > > > I see. From my perspective this means that there's nothing to do at > > > all: Code caring about cross-target needs to check for the existence > > > of _D_ISxxx macros anyway because if they don't exsist then the d_type > > > field might not exist at all. At least that's how I see it... > > > > i personally hate this way of library design. instead of defining some > > macros (that eventually do nothing, or return 0) for every target, you > > then end up with ifdef hell in every program. this is a perfect example > > for that kind of thing infact, defining the macros doesnt hurt anyone > > and has zero drawbacks. > > Maybe I get you wrong but the macros in question are taking the d_type > field as parameter. So if there's no d_type at all you'd get a > compiler error. #define _DE_ISREG(t) 0 how does that result in a compiler error? code that is written the "typical" way using these macros might even work correctly without change =P -- http://www.hitmen-console.org http://magicdisk.untergrund.net http://www.pokefinder.org http://ftp.pokefinder.org In C++, friends can access each others' private members. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Mon Jun 25 18:21:19 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-06-25 18:21:23 CEST