Re: 23.0.50 compile problem on Windows XP

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 15:30:58 +0530
> From: dhruva <dhruvakm@gmail.com>
> Cc: "Jason Rumney" <jasonr@gnu.org>, sridhar_ml@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> On 10/5/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > I still think that we should avoid a macro with a name that's
> > identical to a standard function.  We should rename it to something
> > that cannot clash with the standard C library.
> 
> If we are trying to overcome a limitation, IMHO, we are forced to
> redifine the macro with the same name, else, we will have to make
> changes in the code to use a different name.

Well, of course I meant to modify all the callers of `abs' to use the
alternative name!  There are about 65 places in 13 source files where
`abs' is used; renaming them all is a trivially simple job.

> Samba project has done this sort of a thing by using function pointers
> to all (almost) system API functions. On platforms which have those
> APIs, they point to the system provided function and on platforms
> where they are not, we implement them in a shared library (to delay
> the binding and provide flexibility by just replacing the shared
> library/implementation).

I don't see how this experience is relevant: we are talking about a
macro, not a function, and a macro whose name is reserved for a
standard library function, on top of that.