2011/8/28 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com>: > On 08/28/2011 10:05 PM, Kai Tietz wrote: >> >> 2011/8/28 Paolo Carlini<paolo.carl...@oracle.com>: >>> >>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> this patch adds some errno values supported by newer runtime-version. >>>> To keep backward compatibility >>>> this patch checks for their definition before trying to use them. >>> >>> Any particular reason for not using [GLIBCXX_CHECK_SYSTEM_ERROR] for >>> mingw >>> too (by extending the list of checked syserr appropriately)? >>> >>> Paolo. >> >> Well, I see here a possible clash for EOVERFLOW, which is defined for >> Windows crt to E2BIG. So we would have in list a double enumerator >> value for value_too_large and argument_list_too_long. Additionally we >> might want to include the socket-errors from WSA-equivalents. Well, >> not sure about the later, but at least I found this comment in header. > > I don't understand: I only suggested using for mingw too the > [GLIBCXX_CHECK_SYSTEM_ERROR] machinery (which is run *anyway* on mingw too), > for the constants you are interested in, by adding those to the m4_foreach > list. > > Paolo.
Ah, now I got you. Hmm, well, I see here no advantage in adding another macro to check for an macro. As in code of libstdc++ there is actual no use for those new ones. But if you insist on that, I can add them and replace #if guards by #if HAVE_.... style. Nevertheless, for some error-numbers (eg. EAFNOSUPPORT, EBADMSG, etc) - which are socket API related - there is no constant define in errno.h (and never will be). So code to emulate this would be still a manual thing in error_constants.h header AFAICS (if we plan to support them for mingw targets). Kai
