Hi Bruno, > > > 2. ctype/safe-ctype conflict. For instance, cp-support.c includes > > > safe-ctype.h. But at the same time, we previously included > > > defs.h, which itself includes gnulib/stdint.h, which includes > > > <wchar.h> which includes <ctypes.h>. > > > > > Problem #2 is a lot more problematic, however. I might argue that > > > this is a actually bug inside gnulib and that gnulib/stdint.h > > > should be generated in a way that avoids including other standard > > > header files. > > No. gnulib makes no guarantee that particular headers or symbols are > not defined.
I wasn't really suggesting that gnulib should make a general guaranty, but if the wchar.h include could easily be avoided, then it would have made GDB's life a little easier. It was worth asking :) > 3. In those places where gnulib could control these extra #includes, > the price would be sets of #ifdefs that would be too clumsy to be > maintainable. I see your point. > The bug is in safe-ctype.h: > > #ifdef isalpha > #error "safe-ctype.h and ctype.h may not be used simultaneously" > #endif > > Actually I don't see the reason for this #error: safe-ctype.h defines only > uppercase-named macros, and <ctype.h> defines only lowercase-named or > underscore-prefixed macros. I will see with the GCC maintainers what they think. Maybe the check made better sense at one point, but no longer makes sense today. I checked the public history of that file and version 1 of that file (dated circa 2000) already defines the macros in uppercase and has the isalpha macro check. -- Joel
