httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: NO_LONG_DOUBLE?
Date Tue, 23 Nov 1999 15:55:04 GMT
Hmmm... doesn't ring a bell. It may have been something I added when I
was updating snprintf to allow for these, but to be honest, I'm not
too sure about that. I'll check the CVS logs.

Manoj Kasichainula wrote:
> 
> What is NO_LONG_DOUBLE? I see it defined, but it isn't used anywhere
> in the 1.3 or 2.0 trees.
> 
> autoconf provides an AC_C_LONG_DOUBLE define, so if NO_LONG_DOUBLE
> still serves a purpose, can "HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE" be an acceptable
> substitute?
> 
> -- 
> Manoj Kasichainula - manojk at io dot com - http://www.io.com/~manojk/
> 


-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
                "Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"

Mime
View raw message