------- Additional Comments From ams at gnu dot org 2005-08-01 18:24 -------
Subject: Re: MAXPATHLEN usage in fortran/{scanner,module}.c
> So, does GNU define _POSIX_PATH_MAX?
>
> No.
Then GNU isn't POSIX compliant.
Sorry, I meant yes. We do define _POSIX_PATH_MAX. My brain failed to
communicate this to my fingers.
(As for GNU being POSIX compliant, we are POSIX compliant where it
makes sense)
>
> Does GNU support pathconf()?
>
> Yes.
Use pathconf instead of ...
>
> I read the other thread where it is suggested that a non-portable
> GNU extension should be used. The gfortran source is fairly clean
> from such kludges, and I would oppose the introduction of one.
>
> In this case using getcwd(NULL, 0) (and it is easy to make this
> portable), isn't neeed. But there is nothing "kludgy" about GNU
> programs using GNU extentions.
this ugly hack.
This isn't a ugly hack. GNU programs should use GNU extentions where
possible.
Don't bother with gfortran. I've regression testing a patch that
uses alloca as suggested by Andrew.
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23065
