Thu Sep 22 03:48:00 GMT 2005
On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 18:39 -0400, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > Jeff,
> > I am having doubt on this patch you applied yesterday:
> > Index: libc/include/inttypes.h
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/newlib/libc/include/inttypes.h,v
> > retrieving revision 1.1
> > retrieving revision 1.2
> > diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
> > --- libc/include/inttypes.h 20 Sep 2005 19:25:57 -0000 1.1
> > +++ libc/include/inttypes.h 20 Sep 2005 21:21:51 -0000 1.2
> > @@ -14,6 +14,8 @@
> > #define _INTTYPES_H
> > #include <stdint.h>
> > +#define __need_wchar_t
> > +#include <stddef.h>
> > #define __STRINGIFY(a) #a
> > IMO, this kind patch should be applied to stdint.h instead, because
> > "stdint.h exports types", while "inttypes.h uses them", and because
> > stdint.h probably will need stddef.h to get wchar_t support, anyway.
> > Ralf
> Actually, nothing in stdint.h implies it refers to wchar_t, only
> inttypes.h does.
Only partially true: stdint.h is supposed to look at limits of wchar_t.
Whether it actually knows wchar_t is an internal implementation detail.
But this is what we are discussing here.
> If you look at glibc's implementation you will see it
> does the same thing as I do - namely, it includes the wchar_t type where
> it is needed. The inttypes.h header has prototypes that refer to
> wchar_t so it has to ensure the type is defined.
I know why you added the patch ;)
> Another way to look at this is that if someone wants to supply their own
> stdint.h, what are the chances it will have wchar_t defined there? (both
> Cygwin and glibc's stdint.h don't, for example).
Well, stdint.h and inttypes.h are standardized system headers and always
come in pairs, more precisely, they always must be synchronized with all
other system headers (e.g. esp. sys/types.h, stddef.h, limits.h).
All I am saying is, I expect we will not be able to avoid including
wchar.h in stdint.h because I expect we will have to know wchar_t in
Future will tell, there is no need for immediate action at this point in
More information about the Newlib