🚀 go-pugleaf

Piet van Oostrum writes:
> I tried to compile G++/LIBG++ (1.36.1) on HP-UX 6.5, with Darryl's patches.
> The ctype patch didn't work out on my system for two reasons:
> 
> 1. The name is not _ctype, but __ctype on my system.
> 2. In contrast to other Unix systems the table has the first (superfluous)
> element missing, so all (_ctype_+1)'s should be __ctype.
> 
> I don't know why this is different on my system, but the following works:
> I got the whole system running with the native assembler and loader.

[ Note: the following was originally determined by examination of
  include and object (binary) files.  It was not "determined" through
  the use of any documentation or un*x source. ]

1. On HP-UX, "__ctype" is declared as:

	extern unsigned char	*__ctype;

   This is a *POINTER* to the actual ctype array "_ctype" (and this
   pointer also seems to point to the *second* element in the ctype
   array, and not the first element).

2. Because the pointer "__ctype" points to the second element of the
   array (index "1"), you do not, as you have discovered, need the
   "(_ctype_+1)".  However, as the patch that was originally distributed
   uses the "_ctype" array and not the "__ctype" pointer, you do need
   the "(_ctype_+1)".

     I recommend using the original patch, as it does not require that
all the "(_ctype_+1)"s be changed to "__ctype".  Also, referring to the
"_ctype" array is slightly faster than using an indirect pointer.

     When you tried the original patch, why did it not work?

     -- Darryl Okahata
	UUCP: {hplabs!, hpcea!, hpfcla!} hpnmd!darrylo
	Internet: darrylo%hpnmd@hpcea.HP.COM

DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion or policy of Hewlett-Packard or of the
little green men that have been following him all day.