[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ?? |
Date: |
05 May 2003 13:48:59 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
Thomas Dickey <address@hidden> writes:
> > No. C99 says that implementations predefine the symbol __STDC_IEC_559__
>
> ...leading to the (absurd as usual) conclusion that autoconf is only
> fit for c99.
If one didn't pay attention to the rest of the message that I wrote, I
suppose that one might reach that conclusion. But I agree that it
would be an absurd conclusion. The code example that I gave works
fine with existing Autoconf versions and with C89 (and even K&R)
compilers. Code like that has run in GNU Emacs for many years.
- Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/05/03
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Paul Eggert, 2003/05/04
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Thomas E. Dickey, 2003/05/04
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/05/04
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Paul Eggert, 2003/05/04
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/05/05
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Mr E_T, 2003/05/05
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Paul Eggert, 2003/05/05
- Message not available
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Dr. David Kirkby, 2003/05/05
Re: Why is malloc being defined as rpl_malloc ??, Jim Meyering, 2003/05/05