On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, Mike Stump wrote: > On Oct 24, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@bitrange.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Oct 2013, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >> I too would like to include this change on those branches, as > >> recent generic newlib changes has caused these tests to break > >> (regress) for my autotester for cris-elf testing those branches. > > > > Uhm, I'm on the fence, half-way wanting to retract my > > suggestion. This seems a recent bug in newlib, in which e.g. > > #include <stdlib.h> causes uint32_t to be defined, bleeding from > > newlib-internal include of stdint.h. On the other hand, testing > > that bleed isn't the purpose of these tests. > > Ah, that's what I was interested in, recent change in newlib; > that makes it even more reasonable to me. Standard headers > are supposed to include all headers they need,
But only as allowed by the standard. No gratuitous leaking of identifiers allowed. > and if they > need uint32_t (or any of the types the header that defines that type > has in it) in an interface in any header that that header > needs? > then it isn't a gratuitous stupidity. Yeah, but in this case it was. None of the standard contents in stdlib.h need uint32_t, at face value. A look in the C99 standard make me say <http://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2013/msg00803.html>. brgds, H-P
