Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >If you believe that this is a C preprocessor issue, then you seem to miss
> >the
> >needed knowledge in programming.
> >
> >The patch in question tries to add code that is not valid C.
> >
> >I am not willing to add code that prevents compilation because it is not
> >valid
> >C.
>
> The only other thing that could be considered "wrong" about the patch
> is that it uses a leading __ in a macro name, which is reserved by the
> standard. Is that your objection?
>From the viewpoint of C, there is no macro but just superfluous text.
> Otherwise, the patch provides a fix for a clear programming bug in
> your code - assuming alignment/packing within a structure is
> non-portable.
As I already said: A useful patch would not break compilation
on a typical platform.
My complusion is that this is _not_ a solution for a problem. Including this
patch would cause problems that have not been present before.
> Joerg, you really are incredibly difficult to work with. If you see a
> problem with a patch, please point it out clearly so that other people
> can see it too. Or do you just see this as some kind of a childish
> game where you can "prove" that you're better than everybody else?
I am sorry but if you are missing the needed skills, it is hard to
discuss things with you.
I thought you had at least knowledge in C programming.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
