Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 13:53:44 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: iso646.h and some questions
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003081242250.16372-100000@acp3bf>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000308135129.7315F@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:

> > > 	#undef NULL
> > > 	#define NULL 0
> > 
> > Won't this make trouble in C++ programs?
> 
> Why should it? This is the exact definition found in current DJGPP
> headers, already.

See stdlib.h.  Recent versions of libstdc++ define NULL to something like 
__null.  There was a thread about this on djgpp-workers several months 
ago, and I think on c.o.m.d. as well; you might read it for details.

I guess we fixed stdlib, but not stddef...