Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 18:38:54 -0800 From: David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU> To: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.ORG>, Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@attbi.com>, freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG, kan@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: WCHAR_MIN and WCHAR_MAX not defined in <wchar.h> Message-ID: <20030220023854.GA93198@HAL9000.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20030219205726.G61431@espresso.bsdmike.org> References: <20030219223313.GA93707@attbi.com> <20030220112847.A36977@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20030219205726.G61431@espresso.bsdmike.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>: > Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > I'll add a definition of WCHAR_MIN and WCHAR_MAX to <wchar.h> as soon as I > > can find a clean (non-polluting) way of doing it. > > Do we need a <machine/_limits.h> with underscored macro variants? Why > the specification's authors couldn't keep all the limits in a single > header, I'll never know. It would be nice for math.h's FP_ILOGB* macros, which should really be defined in terms of INT_MIN and INT_MAX. But unless someone decides to change the size of an int any time soon, that may not be enough to justify going out of the way to make a _limits.h. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030220023854.GA93198>