Hi Austin,

Thanks for the speedy reaction!

On 4/20/05, Austin Ziegler <halostatue / gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/20/05, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels / gmail.com> wrote:
> > in apr.hw (renamed to apr.h during windows build):
> >
> > typedef int pid_t
> > typedef int gid_t
> > typedef int uid_t
> >
> > in win32.h from the ruby-mswin32-1.8.2 zip:
> >
> > #define pid_t int
> > #define gid_t int
> > #define uid_t int
> 
> I believe that apr.h defines this properly, and Ruby should do it the
> same. There should also be a guard (somehow?) against doing this more
> than once.

You are aware that currently they don't operate in the same definition
space, right?

Oh, but you mean that Ruby should switch to using typedef and somehow
should detect that the type already exists? I'm not aware of the
possibility to do so, but if the compiler only issues a warning, that
would be fine by me.

I was also thinking that maybe both sides should use (in the unix
version of their systems) ruby_pid_t and apr_pid_t. Then, those can be
defined to pid_t on Unix systems and to int on Win32. Also, it would
prevent namespace conflicts...

Are the ruby-mswin maintainers on this list? 

bye,

Erik.