From:	khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu (Mumit Khan)
Subject:	Re: I: gcc ... -U_WIN32 ... may cause problems
4 Sep 1998 21:27:29 -0700 :
Message-ID:	<9809022023.AA07080.cygnus.gnu-win32@modi.xraylith.wisc.edu>
References:	<3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 19980902145002 DOT 00b1c2b0 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
To:	"Larry Hall (RFK Partners Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
Cc:	gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

"Larry Hall (RFK Partners Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com> writes:
> The best argument I have for getting rid of _WIN32 from cygwin and mingw is 
> that MS docs claim _WIN32 is MS compiler specific.  

As far as I know, _MSC_VER, not _WIN32, is the microsoft-compiler specific 
macro. A quick look at some of the microsoft's headers, eg., pshpack1.h,
suggests the same as well. My *rather old* on-line API docs here tell me 
that _WIN32 is specific to Microsoft Windows Operating System. Please cite 
the docs you mentiond so I can verify.

>                                                    It says nothing about 
> WIN32 as far as I know.  Since this statement has been made, it seems a 
> shame to make such a compiler specific define more generic, especially 
> since it can be used in code to determine whether compiler/platform 
> specific things need to be considered.  Perhaps _MSC_VER can be used for
> this too but then again, what's the advantage of making _WIN32 generic,
> especially when WIN32, if needed, is available and even more intuitive? 
> 

Because _WIN32 is the commonly used one and suggested by OS API doc. Also, 
it doesn't pollute user namespace.

Regards,
Mumit

-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".

- Raw text -