Paul Eggert wrote:
> I thought about that, but my kneejerk reaction was that the likelihood that a
> new architecture would come in without C11 support was low enough (and
> declining) that it didn't seem worth the trouble of adding a dependency on
> the
> longlong module.
OK.
> But perhaps I
Bruno Haible wrote:
How about adding a member
#if @HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT@
long long int __li;
#endif
to this union? Not that it would make a difference on the existing
architectures, but it may be more future-proof.
I thought about that, but my kneejerk reaction was that the likelihood th
Hi Paul,
On 2014-12-12 you wrote:
> +/* Some platforms lack max_align_t. */
> +#if !@HAVE_MAX_ALIGN_T@
> +typedef union
> +{
> + char *__p;
> + double __d;
> + long double __ld;
> + long int __i;
> +} max_align_t;
> +#endif
How about adding a member
#if @HAVE_LONG_LONG_INT@
long long in
LGTM
thanks!
* doc/posix-headers/stddef.texi (stddef.h): Document max_align_t.
* lib/stddef.in.h (_@GUARD_PREFIX@_STDDEF_H) [__need_wint_t]:
Do not undef, as that might cause max_align_t to be defined twice.
Instead, change use to check for _GL_STDDEF_WINT_T too.
(max_align_t) [!HAVE_MAX_ALIGN_T]: New decl.
* m
