I don't like these kind of "ifndef" tests before defining something because how
do you know it was defined compatibly? Granted MIN is well-known so that's
less likely than other uses of this pattern.
Can the definition be made identical to the other definition to eliminate a
warning or does GCC still warn about a redefinition?
> On Nov 18, 2014, at 09:37 , Sebastian Huber
> <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>
> ---
> cpukit/libfs/src/dosfs/fat.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/cpukit/libfs/src/dosfs/fat.h b/cpukit/libfs/src/dosfs/fat.h
> index 2f0f75f..26f0699 100644
> --- a/cpukit/libfs/src/dosfs/fat.h
> +++ b/cpukit/libfs/src/dosfs/fat.h
> @@ -68,7 +68,9 @@ extern "C" {
> # define CT_LE_L(v) (v)
> #endif
>
> +#ifndef MIN
> #define MIN(a, b) (((a) < (b)) ? (a) : (b))
> +#endif
>
> #define FAT_HASH_SIZE 2
> #define FAT_HASH_MODULE FAT_HASH_SIZE
> --
> 1.8.4.5
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel@rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Peter
-----------------
Peter Dufault
HD Associates, Inc. Software and System Engineering
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
