This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: vnc and lwip
Gary Thomas wrote:
On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 13:39, Andrew Lunn wrote:
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 08:16:52PM +0100, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
Andrew Lunn wrote:
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 06:33:55PM +0300, Jani Monoses wrote:
Since lwip has a network.h header for compatibility with the other stacks
this can be applied.Will do so if nobody objects.
Personally I dislike <network.h> when the new POSIX standard has a
standardised layout for the BSD sockets API. i.e. <sys/socket.h> etc.
network.h is not normal, but it does sort out the macro magic needed
to get the header files to compile correctly. I think thats why Gary
decided to invent it.
Macro magic is an obstacle to using portable code without jumping through
non-obvious (even if documented) hoops.
Exactly, but with the new [FreeBSD] stack this is not so important.
Putting -D__ECOS=1 in the global CFLAGS might be better anyway so it
appears in application flags that copy the global ones.
It does still provide some useful stuff, including prototypes for
Fair enough, although that should live under <cyg/...>. Given the way we
define include paths we already clash with any user code that have their
own network.h that they want to include even by #include "network.h". We
should keep the top level directory free of non-standard headers.
Anyway, I'm too lazy to do anything about the existing situation :-), but
I'd dislike any standardisation on something non-standard.
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine