Re: typedef int wchar_t;

[Alexander Nasonov <alnsn%yandex.ru@localhost>]

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> The part adding !defined(__cplusplus) is fine, the part using
> !defined(__ICC) is not.

I know it's not right. In fact, I didn't ask NetBSD developers to
commit my patch as-is. I reported what worked. And __ICC is there
because I often compile NetBSD and packages with gcc on the same
box and I didn't want to hit a subtle bug.

But if you believe __cplusplus guard is safe, I'd happy to revert
my local changes.

Thanks,
Alex