Subject: Re: include path question
From: Sam TH (sam@uchicago.edu)
Date: Sat Jan 27 2001 - 23:35:11 CST
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 11:22:42PM -0600, Michael D . Pritchett wrote:
> On 2001.01.27 19:02:49 -0600 Mike Nordell wrote:
> >
> > This is not just a rethorical question, this is a real problem I'm facing
> > again and I'd like to know AW developers opinion on what *you* think is
> > the
> > correct behaviour, not from "this is the way it has always been done" but
> > what your common sense tells you.
> >
> > /Mike - please, please, don't cc
> >
> >
>
> Okay my $0.02.
>
> Don't bother with any paths names in the #include statments. Instead use
> the compilers include search patterns to find the proper file. Paths (even
> relative ones) generally mess up porting between various platforms.
>
Paths are sometimes neccessary, however. I remember once needing to
include a file named foo.h, but a different foo.h than the compiler
found in the search path. So the absolute path had to be used.
I can dig up what actually happend, if you care Mike.
sam th
sam@uchicago.edu
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
GnuPG Key:
http://www.abisource.com/~sam/key
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat Jan 27 2001 - 23:35:54 CST