should UINT32 be a macro or typedef?

Mon Dec 10 12:25:00 GMT 2001

Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
> Adam> Somewhere in the headers pulled in by libjava/boehm.cc, one
> Adam> header wants UINT32 to be a #define, and another wants it to be
> Adam> a typedef. I haven't figured out exactly where the conflict is,
> Adam> but when I find it, which one is "right"?

> Do either the GC or libjava use this?

Yeah, it's a five-step transitive inclusion... if you like I can
unhack it and rebuild to get the sequence of includes that causes the
problem.
> I don't remember ever seeing it. If that's the case then it is some
> kind of clash between system headers. In that scenario any
> documented fix is fine.

Okay, I'll leave the undef and put a comment by it. It's probably the
mingw headers...
 - a