Suggestions

[RP Lund]

In article <200004261901.MAA29169 at purple.trimedia.sv.sc.philips.com>,
   Jonathan Coxhead <jonathan at doves.demon.co.uk> wrote:

[Snip]

>    Very useful---hard facts! Thank you.

>    This is a platform-specific thing, so the answer for Linux doesn't 
> tell us much about what we ned to know. If it's true for RISC O S as 
> well, for me it carries the implication that no-one uses OSLib with 
> C++. But I know they do, so it can't be. (Does that make sense?)

>    If RISC O S C++ has |sizeof (bool) == 1|, we are stuck, as Ainsley 
> says. But as long as it is 4, no problems, and no change necessary.

#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
  printf("RiscOS G++ size of bool is %d\n", sizeof(bool));

  return 0;
}


g++ bool.cc -o bool -liostream 
Drlink AOF Linker  Version 0.34  01/02/98
bool 
RiscOS G++ size of bool is 1

Oh dear!  but I haven't had any problems with it yet.

>    But we would still be a hostage to fortune: if a new compiler came 
> along, with a different definition of |bool|, we'd be stuck. We would 
> have to use |osbool, ostrue, osfalse| (and also |osbits, osnone, 
> osall|, for consistency) and define |bool| to be |osbool| except in 
> C++, where we leave it alone.

>    If G++ defines |sizeof (bool) == 4| (under RISC O S), I would 
> advocate no change. If it doesn't, we have to do something, and I'm 
> terminally confused :-)

PS Please leave the -D__swi alone. I'm used to it now!

Cheers

Ron

-- 
RP Lund
EMail	:<ron at rplund.demon.co.uk>