apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: __attribute__ redefinition warnings
Date Thu, 06 Mar 2003 01:15:36 GMT
At 06:47 PM 3/5/2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
>William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>Stas, to avoid clobbering what the clib headers already do, would...
>>#ifndef __attribute__
>>#define __attribute__(__x)
>>solve the problem as well?  Does defined(_foo_) pick up _foo_(x) declarations?
>>If not is there such a beast?
>I suppose that this will do. If I remember correcly it doesn't matter what the argumets
are, but the symbol itself. We aren't in C++ here ;)
>but it's possible that that other macro was defined differently. If that's the case, shouldn't
this be overriden? (that's why I've done an unconditional #undef). But I'm not sure what's
the correct way to handle this.
>FWIW, perl defines it as:
> *      This symbol indicates the C compiler can check for function attributes,
> *      such as printf formats. This is normally only supported by GNU cc.
> */
>/*#define HASATTRIBUTE  / **/
>#define __attribute__(_arg_)
>on platforms where __attribute__ is supported, it uncomments:
>/*#define HASATTRIBUTE  / **/

Right.  We shouldn't unconditionally define __attribute__.  If it is
supported (e.g. by gcc) then let that definition be.


View raw message