From owner-freebsd-standards  Wed Feb 19 19:26: 6 2003
Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2A29437B401; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 19:26:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from espresso.bsdmike.org (espresso.bsdmike.org [65.39.129.122])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6337243F93; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 19:26:04 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mike@espresso.bsdmike.org)
Received: by espresso.bsdmike.org (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id A23779C4C; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:13:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:13:40 -0500
From: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.org>
To: Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: 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: <20030219221340.I61431@espresso.bsdmike.org>
References: <20030219223313.GA93707@attbi.com> <20030220112847.A36977@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20030219205726.G61431@espresso.bsdmike.org> <20030220141410.A42150@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030220141410.A42150@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au>; from tjr@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 02:14:10PM +1100
Organization: The FreeBSD Project
Sender: owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-standards.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-standards>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-standards>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.ORG> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 08:57:26PM -0500, Mike Barcroft wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> That would work. If the real information about limits was in
> machine/_limits.h, machine/limits.h would be MI and could be
> renamed to sys/limits.h if backwards compatibility was not
> an issue.

<machine/limits.h> is an implementation detail for userland.  We could
always make <machine/limits.h> include <sys/limits.h> with an
appropriate #warning to transition consumers over.

I vote for this option.

Best regards,
Mike Barcroft

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message