From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2905
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Zvi Gilboa <zg7s@eservices.virginia.edu>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: inttypes.h: possible logical error?
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:26:44 -0400
Message-ID: <5140A8C4.1050207@eservices.virginia.edu>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1363192021 20275 80.91.229.3 (13 Mar 2013 16:27:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:27:01 +0000 (UTC)
To: <musl@lists.openwall.com>
Original-X-From: musl-return-2906-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Mar 13 17:27:24 2013
Return-path: <musl-return-2906-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-2906-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1UFoWP-00018w-26
	for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:27:21 +0100
Original-Received: (qmail 7905 invoked by uid 550); 13 Mar 2013 16:26:57 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 7896 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2013 16:26:57 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130221 Thunderbird/17.0.3
X-Originating-IP: [68.229.98.213]
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2905
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2905>

Greetings,

In inttypes.h, the first "actual" lines read:

...
#include <features.h>
#include <stdint.h>

#define __NEED_wchar_t
#include <bits/alltypes.h>
...

As it seems, the idea is to have <bits/alltypes.h> processed with  
__NEED_wchar_t  already defined.  However, <bits/alltypes.h> is also 
included by <stdint.h>.

In a way this is rather harmless, specifically since <bits/alltypes.h> 
can be processed more than once, yet wouldn't it be more logical and/or 
consistent to #define __NEED_wchar_t  prior to including <stdint.h>?  
Given no conflicting considerations, the above code snippet would then read:

...
#define __NEED_wchar_t

#include <features.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <bits/alltypes.h> /* possibly redundant?  see stdint.h */
...

Thanks in advance for any and all feedback!

Best regards,
Zvi Gilboa