Re: [Mingw-users] Re: mingw and VB

[Wu Y. <ad...@ne...>]

So should I do it now?  Or you implement the pragma?

If I do it, what macro names would you recommend?  I would really like 
to use the straightforward names _CRTIMP and _CRTAPI.  I don't suppose 
it could cause troubles -- though Microsoft used _CRTAPI1, _CRTAPI2, and 
_CRTIMP in MSVC 6 headers.  Borland has these three macros too.  Using 
the same names also help to keep compatibility with other headers: 
Microsoft's comment on _CRTAPI1 and _CRTAPI2 is "for compatibility with 
the NT SDK".

Best regards,

Wu Yongwei

--- Original Message from Danny Smith ---

--- Wu Yongwei <ad...@ne...> wrote:
 >
 > It seems we need to define both _CRTIMP and _CRTAPI, right?

Yes.  But use different names, those ones might be copyrighted :)

 >
 > One thing still puzzles me.  If I only modify the C headers, there
 > seem to be problems using -mrtd in the C++ program utilizing
 > libstdc++. Marking the C++ headers seems really laborious and
 > frightens me.

I hadn't though about C++ headers.  What happens to 3rd party "standard"
headers like STLPort Hmm, I wonder if there is a way to have -mrtd _not_
apply to headers marked with #pragma GCC system_header or some other
#pragma.

 > Any suggestions on this (or we just leave it untouched)?  Is it
 > useful to mark only C headers?

IMO, yes, but the #pragma (or C99 _Pragma) option  would be a lot easier
to maintain if it can be made to work.

Danny