Thread overview | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
July 17, 2004 version(Windows) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Is version(Windows) always defined with the Win32 compiler? I'm trying to cross-compile Linux, and it keeps thinking that Windows is defined, so I am assuming the answer is yes. May we have an option to undefine a version? (Of course, the option I'd prefer - to not have any defined - will die in a howl of catcalls and bleats, so I'll not even seriously propose it.) For the moment, I'll get around this by putting the Linux blocks first ... |
July 18, 2004 Re: version(Windows) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Matthew | In article <cdc97e$1mme$1@digitaldaemon.com>, "Matthew" <admin@stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> wrote: > Is version(Windows) always defined with the Win32 compiler? > > I'm trying to cross-compile Linux, and it keeps thinking that Windows is defined, so I am assuming the answer is yes. > > May we have an option to undefine a version? (Of course, the option I'd prefer - to not have any defined - will die in a howl of catcalls and bleats, so I'll not even seriously propose it.) How about -version with no arguments? That would cause every previously (or implicitly) invoked -version option to be forgotten (kind of like how -I- causes some compilers to forget the #include search path). So in this case, you would use '-version' before any '-version=foo' option. Of course, you might not always want to forget all default -version options, so maybe it's better to have an 'un-define' option implemented first. |
July 18, 2004 Re: version(Windows) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Matthew | Matthew wrote: > Is version(Windows) always defined with the Win32 compiler? > > I'm trying to cross-compile Linux, and it keeps thinking that Windows is defined, > so I am assuming the answer is yes. > > May we have an option to undefine a version? (Of course, the option I'd prefer - > to not have any defined - will die in a howl of catcalls and bleats, so I'll not > even seriously propose it.) I think of this as two questions: 1. Should we be able to undefine a version? Maybe. I'm afraid we might be creating more problems for ourselves (new subtle errors), but I can see possible uses for this feature. Would the possible new problems be worth the new abilities? I don't know, but I think it's good to discuss these issues. 2. How would undefining version work? Perhaps we could undefine all versions at once: Maybe at the commandline we could use "-version=void" And within the code, we could use: version = void; Or we could undefine individual versions. version = void Windows; Would that create an error if Windows wasn't previously defined? version(Windows) version = void Windows; I'm just thinking in written form. > > For the moment, I'll get around this by putting the Linux blocks first ... -- Justin (a/k/a jcc7) http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/ |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation