Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 19:05:34 +0200:
> On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200:
>>> I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not
>>> implemented is not good.
>>
>> Why are you telling us that? You have commit access.
>
> I don't want to break something. Maybe those will get implemented soon?
>

Fair enough.

However, we don't have a practice of keeping declarations without
corresponding definitions. If that is indeed the case (as opposed to
definitions which are conditional on preprocessor macros that the
declaration isn't conditional upon), IMO go ahead and drop the
declarations.

> If it's ok, I can remove those from those headers (found a few more in
> the mean time).
>
> Stefan

Thanks,

Daniel
Received on 2011-05-28 19:34:14 CEST