Re: Our dirfd(3) is a macro not a function

2020-09-09 Thread Kamil Rytarowski
On 09.09.2020 10:57, Paul Ripke wrote: > TL;DR: Our dirfd(3) is a macro, boost expects a function. POSIX > appears to require a function but allow an additional macro. > FreeBSD, OpenBSD & Linux all provide functions. Perhaps we should, > too? > > Additional details are in my msg to tech-pkg@: > h

Re: Our dirfd(3) is a macro not a function

2020-09-09 Thread Robert Elz
s...@stix.id.au said: | POSIX appears to require a function but allow an additional macro. Everything defined as a function in POSIX is required to be implemented as a function (so, amongst other things, it can be passed by reference to another function, or accessed via a pointer). So if we'

Our dirfd(3) is a macro not a function

2020-09-09 Thread Paul Ripke
TL;DR: Our dirfd(3) is a macro, boost expects a function. POSIX appears to require a function but allow an additional macro. FreeBSD, OpenBSD & Linux all provide functions. Perhaps we should, too? Additional details are in my msg to tech-pkg@: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2020/09/09/msg02