Re: G_HAVE_GROWING_STACK #define

[Tim Janik <timj gtk org>]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Owen Taylor wrote:

> 
> Hmm:
> 
>         case x$g_stack_grows in
>         xyes) echo "#define G_HAVE_GROWING_STACK 1" >>$outfile ;;
>         *)    echo "#define G_HAVE_GROWING_STACK 0" >>$outfile ;;
>         esac
> 
> Isn't the '#define G_HAVE_GROWING_STACK 0' a bug? We don't
> do that for any other HAVE define, and it means that:
> 
>  #ifdef G_HAVE_GROWING_STACK
> 
> Works wrong. Of course, gsignal.c itself does:
> 
>     return G_HAVE_GROWING_STACK ? MAX (c, s) : MIN (c, s);
> 
> So maybe it would be a bad idea to change this now :-(.

well, it could probably be renamed. but then, what's the convention
to name macros that are either 1 or 0 (or anything within an int's
range for that matter)?
also, renaming it is a question of breaking source compatibility,
though that might be a purely theoretical issue.

> 
> Regards,
>                                         Owen
> 
 

---
ciaoTJ