Closed hebasto closed 1 month ago
Addressed comments:
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1532#discussion_r1615986643:
avoid
//
comments which are invalid in C89
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1532#discussion_r1615994037:
Actually, why are you hard coding compiler IDs at all? This just makes things less flexible, and the check should be enough.
Addressed comments:
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1532#discussion_r1616380720:
... to add a commit that makes them consistent, but then we'll also need to
#error
if!defined(__has_feature)
.
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1532#discussion_r1616382346:
... to add a commit that also removes the $GCC check in configure.ac, just to keep the system consistent
Same as https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1517, but for the CMakle build system.
The second commit improves the configure summary (similar to https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/pull/189.