"Steven M. Schweda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I suppose that if your goal is to reveal fairly exotic compiler
> quirks rather than to test for a usable stdbool.h,
Well, one person's "compiler quirks" are another person's "features"....
> cc: Error: ../lib/stdbool.h, line 104: Invalid enumerator. (badenum)
> enum { false = 0, true = 1 };
Thanks for the details. I guess 'false' is a keyword or predefined
macro or something?
I installed the following patch to gnulib. Basically it removes the
"line 104" mentioned above. Can you please verify that it fixes your
problem? Thanks.
2007-10-22 Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fix Tru64 problem with stdbool.h.
* lib/stdbool.in.h (false, true):
[! (defined __cplusplus || defined __BEOS__) && !defined __GNUC__]:
Don't declare as an enum in this situation; it runs afoul of Tru64.
Problem reported by Steven M. Schweda in
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-autoconf/2007-10/msg00019.html>.
diff --git a/lib/stdbool.in.h b/lib/stdbool.in.h
index 150a010..2784a50 100644
--- a/lib/stdbool.in.h
+++ b/lib/stdbool.in.h
@@ -97,10 +97,11 @@ typedef bool _Bool;
"warning: _Bool is a keyword in ISO C99".
Use of an enum type, with IRIX cc, leads to a stupid
"warning(1185): enumerated type mixed with another type".
- The only benefit of the enum type, debuggability, is not important
- with these compilers. So use 'signed char' and no typedef. */
+ Even the existence of an enum type, without a typedef,
+ "Invalid enumerator. (badenum)" with HP-UX cc on Tru64.
+ The only benefit of the enum, debuggability, is not important
+ with these compilers. So use 'signed char' and no enum. */
# define _Bool signed char
-enum { false = 0, true = 1 };
# else
/* With this compiler, trust the _Bool type if the compiler has it. */
# if [EMAIL PROTECTED]@
