Re: Proposal for the 'long long' problems

[Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>]

On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 01:44:49AM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | b)  Same for GLIBCPP_ENABLE_C99.
> 
> This needs more thoughts.

Well, it's on by default already, yes?  A user wouldn't be giving
--enable-c99 in the first place.

Or, are you saying that perhaps it should not be on by default?


> | c)  The ac_c99_* variables be more granular.  For example, if lldiv_t is not
> |     available, we turn off ac_c99_stdlib, which may have been turned on by the
> |     presence of strtoll & company.  Granted that the {presence,absence} of one
> |     probably indicates that of the other, we can't tell from the result.
> 
> Wasn't the current behaviour driven an unacceptable configure time
> performance reasons?

I hadn't planned on doing different tests, just storing their results in a
few more variables.  (No thoughts on exactly which ones yet; just that only
4 different ac_c99_* variables don't capture a wide enough range of
results.)


G'night,
Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams