On Jul 28, 2000, Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or maybe just recommend the use of AC_CHECK_DECL instead?
> Something like that might make more sense, yes. But my understanding
> is that AC_CHECK_DECL(foo) does not define HAVE_FOO.
Right. It doesn't even link. We'd need something that checks for a
declaration and, if compilation succeeds, tries to link.
AC_CHECK_DECL_FUNC?
> How about if we modify AC_CHECK_DECL(foo) so that it defines HAVE_FOO
> as well as HAVE_DECL_FOO?
Works as well, as long as we tweak AC_CHECK_DECL to link too.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me
