Search Results

Search found 2212 results on 89 pages for 'preprocessor definitions'.

Page 7/89 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • stealing inside the move constructor

    - by FredOverflow
    During the implementation of the move constructor of a toy class, I noticed a pattern: array2D(array2D&& that) { data_ = that.data_; that.data_ = 0; height_ = that.height_; that.height_ = 0; width_ = that.width_; that.width_ = 0; size_ = that.size_; that.size_ = 0; } The pattern obviously being: member = that.member; that.member = 0; So I wrote a preprocessor macro to make stealing less verbose and error-prone: #define STEAL(member) member = that.member; that.member = 0; Now the implementation looks as following: array2D(array2D&& that) { STEAL(data_); STEAL(height_); STEAL(width_); STEAL(size_); } Are there any downsides to this? Is there a cleaner solution that does not require the preprocessor?

    Read the article

  • Macro not declared in this scope

    - by NmdMystery
    I'm using a preprocessor #define macro to count the number of functions in a header file: #define __INDEX -1 //First group of functions void func1(void); #define __FUNC1_INDEX __INDEX + 1 void func2(void); #define __FUNC2_INDEX __FUNC1_INDEX + 1 #undef __INDEX #define __INDEX __FUNC2_INDEX //Second group of functions void func3(void); #define __FUNC3_INDEX __INDEX + 1 void func4(void); #define __FUNC4_INDEX __FUNC3_INDEX + 1 #undef __INDEX #define __INDEX __FUNC4_INDEX //Third group of functions void func5(void); #define __FUNC5_INDEX __INDEX + 1 void func6(void); #define __FUNC6_INDEX __FUNC5_INDEX + 1 #undef __INDEX #define __INDEX __FUNC6_INDEX #define __NUM_FUNCTIONS __INDEX + 1 The preprocessor gets through the first two sets of functions just fine, but when it reaches the line: #define __FUNC5_INDEX __INDEX + 1 I get a "not defined in this scope" error for __INDEX. What makes this really confusing is the fact that the same exact thing is done [successfully] in the second group of functions; __FUNC3_INDEX takes on the value of __INDEX + 1. There's no typos anywhere, as far as I can tell... what's the problem? I'm using g++ 4.8.

    Read the article

  • Listing C Constants/Macros

    - by ZJR
    Is there a way to make the GNU C Preprocessor, cpp (or some other tool) list all available macros and their values at a given point in a C file? I'm looking for system-specific macros while porting a program that's already unix savvy and loading a sparse bunch of unix system files. Just wondering if there's an easier way than going hunting for definitions.

    Read the article

  • How do I use theme preprocessor functions for my own templates?

    - by Jergason
    I have several .tpl.php files for nodes, CCK fields, and Views theming. These template files have a lot of logic in them to move things around, strip links, create new links, etc. I understand that this is bad development and not "The Drupal Way". If I understand correctly, "The Drupal Way" is to use preprocessor functions in your template.php file to manipulate variables and add new variables. A few questions about that: Is there a naming convention for creating a preprocessor function for a specific theme? For example, if I have a CCK field template called content-field-field_transmission_make_model.tpl, how would I name the preprocessor function? Can I use template preprocessor functions for node templates, CCK field templates, and Views templates? Do they have different methods of modifying template variables or adding new ones?

    Read the article

  • Macros's that define macros

    - by David Thornley
    Does anyone know how to pull off something like this... I have alot of repetitive macros as : - #define MYMACRO1(x) Do1(x) #define MYMACRO2(x,y) Do2(x, y) #define MYNEXTMACRO1(x) Do1(x) #define MYNEXTMACRO2(x,y) Do2(x, y) The code above works fine, but I want to write a macro that creates macros (a meta macro). For example: - #define MYMETAMACRO(name) \ #define #name1(x) Do1(x) \ #define #name2(x,y) Do2(x, y) \ Such that I can do : - MYMETAMACRO(MYMACRO); MYMETAMACRO(MYNEXTMACRO); and then : - MYMACRO1(2); MYMACRO2(2,3); MYNEXTMACRO1(4); MYNEXTMACRO2(4, 5); The preprocessor bombs out at the #define as it thinks it is a missing parameter of the macro.

    Read the article

  • CPP extension and multiline literals in Haskell

    - by jetxee
    Is it possible to use CPP extension on Haskell code which contains multiline string literals? Are there other conditional compilation techniques for Haskell? For example, let's take this code: -- If the next line is uncommented, the program does not compile. -- {-# LANGUAGE CPP #-} msg = "Hello\ \ Wor\ \ld!" main = putStrLn msg If I uncomment {-# LANGUAGE CPP #-}, then GHC refutes this code with a lexical error: [1 of 1] Compiling Main ( cpp-multiline.hs, cpp-multiline.o ) cpp-multiline.hs:4:17: lexical error in string/character literal at character 'o' Using GHC 6.12.1, cpphs is available. I confirm that using cpphs.compat wrapper and -pgmP cpphs.compat option helps, but I'd like to have a solution which does not depend on custom shell scripts. -pgmP cpphs does not work. P.S. I need to use different code for GHC < 6.12 and GHC = 6.12, is it possible without preprocessor?

    Read the article

  • clang parser pass example

    - by anon
    Hi! Can anyone paste sample code for a clang extra preprocessor pass where it: takes every variable named "foo", and renames it "bar", thus making the following code legal: int main() { int foo; bar = 5; } ? Thanks! [Aside: what I'm trying to do is write my own macro system for clang. Doing the above will let me inject at the right level to do my rewrites.] Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using the Antenna and J2ME Polish preprocessors interchangeably and setting a variable value

    - by walter
    I have J2ME code, which I want to be able to compile using the J2ME Polish preprocessor or the wtkpreprocessor (antenna). They mostly use the same directives so it usually works, but ... When I want to insert an URL value in the Java code this gives a problem. In Antenna the code would look like this: //#ifdef my.url //# System.out.println("My Url"); //#expand String location = "%my.url%"; //#else System.out.println("Default"); String location = "http://www.some.default.url.com"; //#endif and in J2ME Polish it would look like this: //#ifdef my.url:defined //# System.out.println("My Url"); //#= String location = "${my.url}"; //#else System.out.println("Default"); String location = "http://www.some.default.url.com"; //#endif I want some way in which I can use the preprocessors interchangeably and still be able to set the url in the build.xml, any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Visual C++ 2010 solution-wide macros with parameters

    - by OregonGhost
    I'm trying to compile some source code with Visual C++ 2010 Express. The code was written for GCC, and contains attributes like this: struct something { ... } __attribute__((packed)); Since this is not standard C++ syntax, Visual C++ doesn't recognize it. With this macro prior to the struct declaration, it works fine: #define __attribute__(p) But I don't want to alter the files. I created a new property sheet (GccCompat), and went to Preprocessor Definitions, and added the macro, like this: __attribute__(p) or like this: __attribute__(p)= But it doesn't work. It's simply not called. If I define just __attribute__ (without parameters) in the same location, the macro is correctly defined. Note that the command line that is generated looks fine (the macros with parameters are passed exactly the same as the ones without), but the compiler seems to ignore it. So, how can I globally define my macro with a parameter?

    Read the article

  • Preprocess strings file during Xcode build

    - by stigi
    Hello, I know there's a way to preprocess my info.plist file, but is there a similar way to process strings files inside my Settings.bundle? My problem: I have an iPhone app and I want the the user to know about the currently installed version. I do this by displaying it in the apps settings. Now every time i change the bundle version in my info.plist i also have to change the version in the Root.strings in the Settings.bundle. I could run a script action that updates it, but it would be nice to use the preprocessor since I could do even more fun things with it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Syncronizing indices of function pointer table to table contents

    - by Thomas Matthews
    In the embedded system I'm working on, we are using a table of function pointers to support proprietary Dynamic Libraries. We have a header file that uses named constants (#define) for the function pointer indices. These values are used in calculating the location in the table of the function's address. Example: *(export_table.c)* // Assume each function in the table has an associated declaration typedef void (*Function_Ptr)(void); Function_Ptr Export_Function_Table[] = { 0, Print, Read, Write, Process, }; Here is the header file: *export_table.h* #define ID_PRINT_FUNCTION 1 #define ID_READ_FUNCTION 2 #define ID_WRITE_FUNCTION 3 #define ID_PROCESS_FUNCTION 4 I'm looking for a scheme to define the named constants in terms of their location in the array so that when the order of the functions changes, the constants will also change. (Also, I would like the compiler or preprocessor to calculate the indices to avoid human mistakes like typeo's.)

    Read the article

  • Stringification of a macro value

    - by SF.
    I faced a problem - I need to use a macro value both as string and as integer. #define RECORDS_PER_PAGE 10 /*... */ #define REQUEST_RECORDS \ "SELECT Fields FROM Table WHERE Conditions" \ " OFFSET %d * " #RECORDS_PER_PAGE \ " LIMIT " #RECORDS_PER_PAGE ";" char result_buffer[RECORDS_PER_PAGE][MAX_RECORD_LEN]; /* ...and some more uses of RECORDS_PER_PAGE, elsewhere... */ This fails with a message about "stray #", and even if it worked, I guess I'd get the macro names stringified, not the values. Of course I can feed the values to the final method ( "LIMIT %d ", page*RECORDS_PER_PAGE ) but it's neither pretty nor efficient. It's times like this when I wish the preprocessor didn't treat strings in a special way and would process their content just like normal code. For now, I cludged it with #define RECORDS_PER_PAGE_TXT "10" but understandably, I'm not happy about it. How to get it right?

    Read the article

  • Problem while compiling the code

    - by Atul
    Can someone points me the problem in the code when compiled with gcc 4.1.0. #define X 10 int main() { double a = 1e-X; return 0; } I am getting error:Exponent has no digits. When i replace X with 10, it works fine. Also i checked with g++ -E command to see the file with preprocessors applied, it has not replaced X with 10. I was under the impression that preprocessor replaces every macro defined in the file with the replacement text with applying any intelligence. Am I wrong? I know this is a really silly question but I am confused and I would rather be silly than confused :). Any comments/suggestions.

    Read the article

  • ParseKit.framework won't work, Foundation.h not found

    - by Jeremy
    I'm really stumped trying to get the ParseKit.framework (this) to work in general, not even bothering to implement it till it runs the demo app that comes with it. What happens is the compiler can't locate < Foundation/Foundation.h or something, which I thought the header was in the linked framework. Exact error: "Lexical or Preprocessor Issue: 'Foundation/Foundation.h' file not found." Here's the code, just from the ParseKit_Prefix.pch: // // Prefix header for all source files of the 'ParseKit' target in the 'ParseKit' project. //#ifdef __OBJC__ #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> #endif Nothing unusual about it, did I mess up the file paths some how? I've reinstalled Xcode, re-downloaded the ParseKit, and nothing is helping. The suggestions here did nothing and it's not this. When I make a new project or use a different project and load the Foundation.framework and #import the header it works just fine. If I unlink the framework I can't find it to re-link again. Has anyone else had this kind of problem? Did I download it wrong somewhere? I have a very difficult time finding where exactly the Xcode UI links stuff, apple must get a kick out of frustrating people, so if anyone has anything they can think of please give me some feedback, I'm horribly confused right now. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Creating serializeable unique compile-time identifiers for arbitrary UDT's.

    - by Endiannes
    I would like a generic way to create unique compile-time identifiers for any C++ user defined types. for example: unique_id<my_type>::value == 0 // true unique_id<other_type>::value == 1 // true I've managed to implement something like this using preprocessor meta programming, the problem is, serialization is not consistent. For instance if the class template unique_id is instantiated with other_type first, then any serialization in previous revisions of my program will be invalidated. I've searched for solutions to this problem, and found several ways to implement this with non-consistent serialization if the unique values are compile-time constants. If RTTI or similar methods, like boost::sp_typeinfo are used, then the unique values are obviously not compile-time constants and extra overhead is present. An ad-hoc solution to this problem would be, instantiating all of the unique_id's in a separate header in the correct order, but this causes additional maintenance and boilerplate code, which is not different than using an enum unique_id{my_type, other_type};. A good solution to this problem would be using user-defined literals, unfortunately, as far as I know, no compiler supports them at this moment. The syntax would be 'my_type'_id; 'other_type'_id; with udl's. I'm hoping somebody knows a trick that allows implementing serialize-able unique identifiers in C++ with the current standard (C++03/C++0x), I would be happy if it works with the latest stable MSVC and GNU-G++ compilers, although I expect if there is a solution, it's not portable.

    Read the article

  • EBS Seed Data Comparison Reports Now Available

    - by Steven Chan (Oracle Development)
    Earlier this year we released a reporting tool that reports on the differences in E-Business Suite database objects between one release and another.  That's a very useful reference, but EBS defaults are delivered as seed data within the database objects themselves. What about the differences in this seed data between one release and another? I'm pleased to announce the availability of a new tool that provides comparison reports of E-Business Suite seed data between EBS 11.5.10.2, 12.0.4, 12.0.6, 12.1.1, and 12.1.3.  This new tool complements the information in the data model comparison tool.  You can download the new seed data comparison tool here: EBS ATG Seed Data Comparison Report (Note 1327399.1) The EBS ATG Seed Data Comparison Report provides report on the changes between different EBS releases based upon the seed data changes delivered by the product data loader files (.ldt extension) based on EBS ATG loader control (.lct extension) files.  You can use this new tool to report on the differences in the following types of seed data: Concurrent Program definitions Descriptive Flexfield entity definitions Application Object Library profile option definitions Application Object Library (AOL) key flexfield, function, lookups, value set definitions Application Object Library (AOL) menu and responsibility definitions Application Object Library messages Application Object Library request set definitions Application Object Library printer styles definitions Report Manager / WebADI component and integrator entity definitions Business Intelligence Publisher (BI Publisher) entity definitions BIS Request Set Generator entity definitions ... and more Your feedback is welcomeThis new tool was produced by our hard-working EBS Release Management team, and they're actively seeking your feedback.  Please feel free to share your experiences with it by posting a comment here.  You can also request enhancements to this tool via the distribution list address included in Note 1327399.1.Related Articles Oracle E-Business Suite Release 12.1.3 Now Available New Whitepaper: Upgrading EBS 11i Forms + OA Framework Personalizations to EBS 12 EBS 12.0 Minimum Requirements for Extended Support Finalized Five Key Resources for Upgrading to E-Business Suite Release 12 E-Business Suite Release 12.1.1 Consolidated Upgrade Patch 1 Now Available New Whitepaper: Planning Your E-Business Suite Upgrade from Release 11i to 12.1

    Read the article

  • Separate specific #ifdef branches

    - by detly
    In short: I want to generate two different source trees from the current one, based only on one preprocessor macro being defined and another being undefined, with no other changes to the source. If you are interested, here is my story... In the beginning, my code was clean. Then we made a new product, and yea, it was better. But the code saw only the same peripheral devices, so we could keep the same code. Well, almost. There was one little condition that needed to be changed, so I added: #if defined(PRODUCT_A) condition = checkCat(); #elif defined(PRODUCT_B) condition = checkCat() && checkHat(); #endif ...to one and only one source file. In the general all-source-files-include-this header file, I had: #if !(defined(PRODUCT_A)||defined(PRODUCT_B)) #error "Don't make me replace you with a small shell script. RTFM." #endif ...so that people couldn't compile it unless they explicitly defined a product type. All was well. Oh... except that modifications were made, components changed, and since the new hardware worked better we could significantly re-write the control systems. Now when I look upon the face of the code, there are more than 60 separate areas delineated by either: #ifdef PRODUCT_A ... #else ... #endif ...or the same, but for PRODUCT_B. Or even: #if defined(PRODUCT_A) ... #elif defined(PRODUCT_B) ... #endif And of course, sometimes sanity took a longer holiday and: #ifdef PRODUCT_A ... #endif #ifdef PRODUCT_B ... #endif These conditions wrap anywhere from one to two hundred lines (you'd think that the last one could be done by switching header files, but the function names need to be the same). This is insane. I would be better off maintaining two separate product-based branches in the source repo and porting any common changes. I realise this now. Is there something that can generate the two different source trees I need, based only on PRODUCT_A being defined and PRODUCT_B being undefined (and vice-versa), without touching anything else (ie. no header inclusion, no macro expansion, etc)?

    Read the article

  • Why are argument substitutions not replaced during rescanning?

    - by James McNellis
    Consider the following macro definitions and invocation: #define x x[0] #define y(arg) arg y(x) This invocation expands to x[0] (tested on Visual C++ 2010, g++ 4.1, mcpp 2.7.2, and Wave). Why? Specifically, why does it not expand to x[0][0]? During macro replacement, A parameter in the replacement list...is replaced by the corresponding argument after all macros contained therein have been expanded. Before being substituted, each argument’s preprocessing tokens are completely macro replaced (C++03 §16.3.1/1). Evaluating the macro invocation, we take the following steps: The function-like macro y is invoked with x as the argument for its arg parameter The x in the argument is macro-replaced to become x[0] The arg in the replacement list is replaced by the macro-replaced value of the argument, x[0] The replacement list after substitution of all the parameters is x[0]. After all parameters in the replacement list have been substituted, the resulting preprocessing token sequence is rescanned...for more macro names to replace (C++03 §16.3.4/1). If the name of the macro being replaced is found during this scan of the replacement list...it is not replaced. Further, if any nested replacements encounter the name of the macro being replaced, it is not replaced (C++03 §16.3.4/2). The replacement list x[0] is rescanned (note that the name of the macro being replaced is y): x is identified as an object-like macro invocation x is replaced by x[0] Replacement stops at this point because of the rule in §16.3.4/2 preventing recursion. The replacement list after rescanning is x[0][0]. I have clearly misinterpreted something since all of the preprocessors I've tested say I am wrong. In addition, this example is a piece of a larger example in the C++0x FCD (at §16.3.5/5) and it too says that the expected replacement is x[0]. Why is x not replaced during rescanning? C99 and C++0x effectively have the same wording as C++03 in the quoted sections.

    Read the article

  • Which is better: many class definitions in the same file or every class definition in a separate file?

    - by Javed Akram
    Which is better: many class definitions in same file or every class definition in separate file? Examples: 1) Many classes in same file. Say, myManyClasses.cs: namespace myPack { class myClass1() { } class myClass2() { } class myClass3() { } . . . } 2) Every class in separate file: myClass1.cs namespace myPack { class myClass1() { } } myClass2.cs namespace myPack { class myClass2() { } } . . .

    Read the article

  • What's the C strategy to "imitate" a C++ template ?

    - by Andrei Ciobanu
    After reading some examples on stackoverflow, and following some of the answers for my previous questions (1), I've eventually come with a "strategy" for this. I've come to this: 1) Have a declare section in the .h file. Here I will define the data-structure, and the accesing interface. Eg.: /** * LIST DECLARATION. (DOUBLE LINKED LIST) */ #define NM_TEMPLATE_DECLARE_LIST(type) \ typedef struct nm_list_elem_##type##_s { \ type data; \ struct nm_list_elem_##type##_s *next; \ struct nm_list_elem_##type##_s *prev; \ } nm_list_elem_##type ; \ typedef struct nm_list_##type##_s { \ unsigned int size; \ nm_list_elem_##type *head; \ nm_list_elem_##type *tail; \ int (*cmp)(const type e1, const type e2); \ } nm_list_##type ; \ \ nm_list_##type *nm_list_new_##type##_(int (*cmp)(const type e1, \ const type e2)); \ \ (...other functions ...) 2) Wrap the functions in the interface inside MACROS: /** * LIST INTERFACE */ #define nm_list(type) \ nm_list_##type #define nm_list_elem(type) \ nm_list_elem_##type #define nm_list_new(type,cmp) \ nm_list_new_##type##_(cmp) #define nm_list_delete(type, list, dst) \ nm_list_delete_##type##_(list, dst) #define nm_list_ins_next(type,list, elem, data) \ nm_list_ins_next_##type##_(list, elem, data) (...others...) 3) Implement the functions: /** * LIST FUNCTION DEFINITIONS */ #define NM_TEMPLATE_DEFINE_LIST(type) \ nm_list_##type *nm_list_new_##type##_(int (*cmp)(const type e1, \ const type e2)) \ {\ nm_list_##type *list = NULL; \ list = nm_alloc(sizeof(*list)); \ list->size = 0; \ list->head = NULL; \ list->tail = NULL; \ list->cmp = cmp; \ }\ void nm_list_delete_##type##_(nm_list_##type *list, \ void (*destructor)(nm_list_elem_##type elem)) \ { \ type data; \ while(nm_list_size(list)){ \ data = nm_list_rem_##type(list, tail); \ if(destructor){ \ destructor(data); \ } \ } \ nm_free(list); \ } \ (...others...) In order to use those constructs, I have to create two files (let's call them templates.c and templates.h) . In templates.h I will have to NM_TEMPLATE_DECLARE_LIST(int), NM_TEMPLATE_DECLARE_LIST(double) , while in templates.c I will need to NM_TEMPLATE_DEFINE_LIST(int) , NM_TEMPLATE_DEFINE_LIST(double) , in order to have the code behind a list of ints, doubles and so on, generated. By following this strategy I will have to keep all my "template" declarations in two files, and in the same time, I will need to include templates.h whenever I need the data structures. It's a very "centralized" solution. Do you know other strategy in order to "imitate" (at some point) templates in C++ ? Do you know a way to improve this strategy, in order to keep things in more decentralized manner, so that I won't need the two files: templates.c and templates.h ?

    Read the article

  • Is there a C pre-processor which eliminates #ifdef blocks based on values defined/undefined?

    - by Jonathan Leffler
    Original Question What I'd like is not a standard C pre-processor, but a variation on it which would accept from somewhere - probably the command line via -DNAME1 and -UNAME2 options - a specification of which macros are defined, and would then eliminate dead code. It may be easier to understand what I'm after with some examples: #ifdef NAME1 #define ALBUQUERQUE "ambidextrous" #else #define PHANTASMAGORIA "ghostly" #endif If the command were run with '-DNAME1', the output would be: #define ALBUQUERQUE "ambidextrous" If the command were run with '-UNAME1', the output would be: #define PHANTASMAGORIA "ghostly" If the command were run with neither option, the output would be the same as the input. This is a simple case - I'd be hoping that the code could handle more complex cases too. To illustrate with a real-world but still simple example: #ifdef USE_VOID #ifdef PLATFORM1 #define VOID void #else #undef VOID typedef void VOID; #endif /* PLATFORM1 */ typedef void * VOIDPTR; #else typedef mint VOID; typedef char * VOIDPTR; #endif /* USE_VOID */ I'd like to run the command with -DUSE_VOID -UPLATFORM1 and get the output: #undef VOID typedef void VOID; typedef void * VOIDPTR; Another example: #ifndef DOUBLEPAD #if (defined NT) || (defined OLDUNIX) #define DOUBLEPAD 8 #else #define DOUBLEPAD 0 #endif /* NT */ #endif /* !DOUBLEPAD */ Ideally, I'd like to run with -UOLDUNIX and get the output: #ifndef DOUBLEPAD #if (defined NT) #define DOUBLEPAD 8 #else #define DOUBLEPAD 0 #endif /* NT */ #endif /* !DOUBLEPAD */ This may be pushing my luck! Motivation: large, ancient code base with lots of conditional code. Many of the conditions no longer apply - the OLDUNIX platform, for example, is no longer made and no longer supported, so there is no need to have references to it in the code. Other conditions are always true. For example, features are added with conditional compilation so that a single version of the code can be used for both older versions of the software where the feature is not available and newer versions where it is available (more or less). Eventually, the old versions without the feature are no longer supported - everything uses the feature - so the condition on whether the feature is present or not should be removed, and the 'when feature is absent' code should be removed too. I'd like to have a tool to do the job automatically because it will be faster and more reliable than doing it manually (which is rather critical when the code base includes 21,500 source files). (A really clever version of the tool might read #include'd files to determine whether the control macros - those specified by -D or -U on the command line - are defined in those files. I'm not sure whether that's truly helpful except as a backup diagnostic. Whatever else it does, though, the pseudo-pre-processor must not expand macros or include files verbatim. The output must be source similar to, but usually simpler than, the input code.) Status Report (one year later) After a year of use, I am very happy with 'sunifdef' recommended by the selected answer. It hasn't made a mistake yet, and I don't expect it to. The only quibble I have with it is stylistic. Given an input such as: #if (defined(A) && defined(B)) || defined(C) || (defined(D) && defined(E)) and run with '-UC' (C is never defined), the output is: #if defined(A) && defined(B) || defined(D) && defined(E) This is technically correct because '&&' binds tighter than '||', but it is an open invitation to confusion. I would much prefer it to include parentheses around the sets of '&&' conditions, as in the original: #if (defined(A) && defined(B)) || (defined(D) && defined(E)) However, given the obscurity of some of the code I have to work with, for that to be the biggest nit-pick is a strong compliment; it is valuable tool to me. The New Kid on the Block Having checked the URL for inclusion in the information above, I see that (as predicted) there is an new program called Coan that is the successor to 'sunifdef'. It is available on SourceForge and has been since January 2010. I'll be checking it out...further reports later this year, or maybe next year, or sometime, or never.

    Read the article

  • What predefined macro can I use to detect clang ?

    - by Pierre Bourdon
    I'm trying to detect the compiler used to compile my source code. I can easily find predefined macros to check for MSVC or GCC (see http://predef.sourceforge.net/ for example), but I cannot find any macro to check for clang. Does someone know if clang defines a macro like __CLANG__ in order to know what is currently compiling my code ?

    Read the article

  • Disable #pragma message("")

    - by Balls-of-steel
    Hi, I needed to include in my project but there is a line, in glut.h which is #pragma message("Note: including lib: glut32.lib\n") It is really annoying and I want to get rid of it when compiling. I could just remove the line in my glut.h but I want my fix to be independent of the glut.h. I have tried setting #pragma warnings to show only critical info, and I have also tried #pragma message disable but nothing worked. Any help?

    Read the article

  • cl.exe Difference in object files when /E output is the same and flags are the same

    - by madiyaan damha
    Hello: I am using Visual Studio 2005's cl.exe compiler. I call it with a bunch of /I /D and some compilation/optimization flags (example: /Ehsc). I have two compilation scripts, and both differ only in the /I flags (include directories are different). All other flags are the same. These scripts produce different object files (and not just a timestamp difference as noted below). The strange thing is that the /E output of both scripts is the same. That means that the include files are not causing the difference in object files, but then again, where is the difference coming from? Can anyone elucidate on how I am seeing two different object files in my situation. If the include files are causing the difference, how come I see identical /E output? PS. The object files are different not only in the timestamp, but in the code sections also. In fact the behavior of my final executable is different in both cases. Edit: PSS: I even looked at the /includeFiles output of cl.exe and that output is identical. The object files, however, differ in more than just the timestamp (in fact, one is 1KB bigger than another!)

    Read the article

  • #if 0 as a define

    - by valerio
    I need a way to define a FLAGS_IF macro (or equivalent) such that FLAGS_IF(expression) <block_of_code> FLAGS_ENDIF when compiling in debug (e.g. with a specific compiler switch) compiles to if (MyFunction(expression)) { <block_of_code> } whereas in release does not result in any instruction, just as it was like this #if 0 <block_of_code> #endif In my ignorance on the matter of c/c++ preprocessors i can't think of any naive way (since #define FLAGS_IF(x) #if 0 does not even compile) of doing this, can you help? I need a solution that: Does not get messed up if */ is present inside <block_of_code> Is sure to generate 0 instructions in release even inside inline functions at any depth (i guess this excludes if (false){<block_of_code>} right?) Is standard compliant if possible Thank you

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >