On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > That makes kind of sense. I would then vote for phasing out B_UNSUPPORTED, > but this would be a binary compatibility problem of sorts. We could deprecate > it, and phase it out with the GCC4 switch? I'd like to make the humble suggestion that you make B_NOT_SUPPORTED an alias to B_UNSUPPORTED and take the rest of the afternoon off. Baring issues with R5 backwards compatibility this seems like the easiest solution. John Scipione