On Apr 19, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > I've had a closer look now and think it's possible (and desirable) to > define HAVE_GAS_HIDDEN for Darwin, too.
But, they don't have the same thing, therefore, either, you loose out on the meaning, or, you must have yet another test that means the rest. In your email, you don't state that you want to loose out, nor do you state that you want an additional test, so, I am left wondering what you want. I'd say, forge ahead, the worst you can do is break everything... You'll either be careful and not break anything, or you will and someone will pipe up with the bit you broke. I'd like to think we have enough tests in the testsuite to ensure you can't silently break the major pieces.
