On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 18:55 +0200, Mosfet wrote:
> What I wanted to say in my last message was the fact I thought it would be
> more logical to add some missing include and implement them instead of
> adding #ifndef _MINGW32CE everywhere.
[..]
> I was just saying that if you provide a minimal imple
What I wanted to say in my last message was the fact I thought it would be
more logical to add some missing include and implement them instead of
adding #ifndef _MINGW32CE everywhere.
Let's examine my case : today I need to generate a D compiler, so if I am
listening to you it means I will h
Philips,
when replying please post to the list, not individually. This way
there's more chance you could get an answer from other developers and
not just one person (in this case me).
In order to try to help (I'm not sure if finally I'll be of great
help), could you post again what you're trying
On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 13:56 +0200, Mosfet wrote:
> I would like to discuss about mingw32ce and the way it's implemented.
[..]
> I know that errno.h, signal.h and ... are not part of the original windows
> CE platform but I think it would be better to provide these headers and to
> implement missing
Hi,
I would like to discuss about mingw32ce and the way it's implemented.
>From what I understand you comment missing include files on the windows CE
platform like this :
/* Define to 1 if you have the header file. */
#undef HAVE_ERRNO_H
or like that
#if _GLIBCXX_HAVE_ERRNO_H
#in
