On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:03:08 -0700 "Andrew Whitworth" (via RT) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by "Andrew Whitworth" > # Please include the string: [perl #51980] > # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. > # <URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=51980 > > > > the snprintf macro was defined in Parrot/misc.h and src/spf_render.c. > I moved both definitions into the misc.h file and used conditionals to > determine which one to activate. The current definition goes like > this: > > 1) if the _MSC_VER macro is defined, use _snprintf > 2) if the PARROT_HAS_C99_SNPRINTF macro is not defined, use > Parrot_secret_snprintf instead > 3) otherwise, don't define the snprintf macro at all. > > In Parrot/has_header.h (which is, I know, automatically generated), > there is a definition on my system for PARROT_HAS_SNPRINTF, but not a > definition for PARROT_HAS_C99_SNPRINTF. I assume, on first glance that > these two macros are one in the same and should be united. I'm not so sure of this - my Linux box, for instance, has both defined. On first glance, it sounds like your system has an snprintf(), but Configure.pl has decided your snprintf() is not C99-compatible. Mark
