[zeromq-dev] ZeroMQ 4.0.4 stable released

Pieter Hintjens ph at imatix.com
Mon Mar 17 22:10:41 CET 2014


We've traditionally used platform.hpp for such macros, which uses the
HAVE_XYZ=1 form.

The code should probably always use the #ifdef form, to be sure. I'd
say that using #if HAVE_XYZ is an error or at least fragile enough to
be worth fixing.

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Frank Hartmann <soundart at gmx.net> wrote:
> Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> writes:
>
>> The process is, fix it on libzmq master with pull requests, then
>> backport commits to stable. I can do the second part when I'm told
>> what commits to backport.
>
>
> Hi Pieter,
>
> I have created https://github.com/zeromq/libzmq/pull/933
>
> ... and milliseconds later you seem to have merged it! Thanks!
>
>
> I have a question with the pull request: Should preprocessor defines
> have a value?
>
> $ git grep HAVE_FORK
> src/signaler.cpp:#ifdef HAVE_FORK
> ...
> src/signaler.cpp:#if HAVE_FORK
>
>
> -DHAVE_FORK   would work for the first usage, but not for the second.
> -DHAVE_FORK=1 would help in the second usage.
>
>
> In the autoconf build flow all HAVE_XYZ macros are of the form
> HAVE_XYZ=1. In the cmake flow the other form. Somehow this invites
> problems.
>
> Do you have a policy which form is preferred?
>
> kind regards
>   Frank
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev



More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list