This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: __STRICT_ANSI__ and stdio.h
- From: KIMURA Masaru <hiyuh dot root at gmail dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:58:34 +0900
- Subject: Re: __STRICT_ANSI__ and stdio.h
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAPYQg31yUkpu9oC1cfWTmxaBANBYcd4X18RY9Q+BVpx-o=nLBw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20151214140649 dot GB29983 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <CAPYQg33AHw4k9hU8kXbsM9WJ3-+9gr5cm1Ob1S7YXO8MP3LGdQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20151215093020 dot GA12827 at calimero dot vinschen dot de>
>> >> is cygwin's __STRICT_ANSI__ and stdio.h behavior not so compatible to glibc's?
>> > Cygwin is using newlib, newlib is BSD based. We introduced the
>> > compatibility checking macros from FreeBSD lately.
>> i roughly checked FreeBSD include/stdio.h and sys/sys/cdefs.h.
>> it looks very different to newlib's.
> Yes, it does. Newlib has a long history diverging from the BSDs to
> support embedded systems in the first place, and compatibility checking
> macros other than __STRICT_ANSI__ and __POSIX_SOURCE weren't much of a
> concern for a long time.
>> FreeBSD has visibility for popen()/pclose() if __POSIX_VISIBLE >= 199209,
>> it looks no checking about __STRICT_ANSI__ in their cdefs.h.
> Yeah, that's history as described above. popen gets declared in newlib
> if __STRICT_ANSI__ is not defined right now.
>> only one thing i worried about is _ANSI_SOURCE in their cdefs.h,
>> (b/c i don't understand where _ANSI_SOURCE comes from...)
>> but it looks _POSIX_C_SOURCE wins anyway.
>> for ease to see, i'd attach simplified their cdefs.h for their
>> visibility handling.
> I don't see the difference, see below. The big differences in newlib
> are the additional handling of _GNU_SOURCE and the old usage of
> __STRICT_ANSI__ in some circumstances which haven't been replaced by another
> usage of compatibility macros yet.
> But here's the deal: Newlib is a volunteer-driven project. If the
> compatiblity checking macros are not correct or not correctly used in
> all circumstances, newlib is happily open to patches. Just send them
> to the newlib AT sourceware DOT org mailing list.
>> #if defined(_POSIX_C_SOURCE) && _POSIX_C_SOURCE == 1
>> #undef _POSIX_C_SOURCE
>> #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 199009
> Same in Newlib's sys/cdefs.h.
ah, i didn't check newlib's sys/cdefs.h.
thank you for correcting my misunderstanding.
apart from standard compliance correctness,
it's good to hear newlib can deal it.
if i had more spare time to dive its source, i'd like to do it.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple