From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 5 14:48:29 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F2637B718 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 14:48:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bright@fw.wintelcom.net) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f25MmNj10637 for hackers@freebsd.org; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 14:48:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 14:48:23 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: fixing flex definitions? Message-ID: <20010305144823.B8663@fw.wintelcom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-all-your-base: are belong to us. Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG The flex scanner template has this in it: #ifndef YY_ALWAYS_INTERACTIVE #ifndef YY_NEVER_INTERACTIVE extern int isatty YY_PROTO(( int )); #endif #endif Which seems to be the wrong thing to do. Would this be an ok fix? I'm worried about the YY_PROTO() messing things up anyone know what the point of doing it this way is? Index: flex.skl =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/usr.bin/lex/flex.skl,v retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -u -r1.4 flex.skl --- flex.skl 1999/10/27 07:56:44 1.4 +++ flex.skl 2001/03/05 22:49:01 @@ -1180,7 +1180,8 @@ %- #ifndef YY_ALWAYS_INTERACTIVE #ifndef YY_NEVER_INTERACTIVE -extern int isatty YY_PROTO(( int )); +/* for isatty() */ +#include #endif #endif -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message