Subject: Re: include path question
From: Hubert Figuiere (hfiguiere@teaser.fr)
Date: Sun Jan 28 2001 - 06:19:01 CST
At 8:19 +0100 28/01/01, Mike Nordell wrote:
>Sam TH wrote:
>> 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.
>
>Don't bother (been there myself and it wasn't a pretty picture).
>
>But, since we will probably never move any of the _internal_ AW directories
>relative to one another, would it be a mess if we started to use e.g
> #include "../../af/xp/yahoo.h"
>?
>
>OK, I here assume that those directories would not be moved, but seriously,
>how large is that risk?
>
>I think that Mac (pre Mac-X) can't handle that since it doesn't know what a
>path is, but do we support that platform?
1/ We plan to support this platform
2/ Since there is no plan to avoid to support any platform, it is
best to not consider doing things that it platform Y we don't support
can't do
3/ MacOS does know about path. It is just that it uses ':' instead of
'/' and '::' instead of '../'.
4/ CodeWarrior, which is the compiler we use currently, does support
UNIX-Style and even DOS-Style path.
5/ we can still use conditionnal compilation if that really matters.
In conclusion, you can go ahead, there will be no problem for MacOS < X
Hub
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sun Jan 28 2001 - 06:19:13 CST