Re: [boost] including platform specific headers

From: Michael Roach (mcr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-06 10:49:05

That's my feeling too. I have started to refactor my code so that the only place these ms-headers get pulled in is in the actual component implementation and not its header.

Seems to be the cleanest means to an end.

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: David Abrahams 
  To: boost_at_[hidden] 
  Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:39 AM
  Subject: Re: [boost] including platform specific headers

  Considering that the Microsoft headers contain all sorts of macro names that
  are supposed to be reserved for users, I usually try very hard to keep them
  out of my headers.

  Long ago I wished that someone would write a simple static library which
  exposes all of the same names inside a namespace, and saves users from the
  effects of "global name grabbing".

  -Dave

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Michael Roach" <mcr_at_[hidden]>
  To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
  Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:27 AM
  Subject: [boost] including platform specific headers

  > I'm working on a project that for the first time has application outside
  of
  > the Microsoft world and am wondering how others handle the situation of
  > keeping their component headers standalone while at the same time not
  > pulling in the entire world for that platform.
  >
  > As an example, given the version API that Microsoft exposes in
  version.lib,
  > you need declarations in shlwapi.h and winver.h -- both of which are
  usually
  > included via windows.h - in addition to the typedefs introduced by
  windef.h.
  >
  > Not wanting to force the user of my components to remember to include
  > windows.h before mine, is it considered O.K. to include all the required
  > header files directly (not via windows.h) even if the supplying vendor
  > doesn't recommend it (i.e., windef.h)?
  >
  > I seem to remember there being a long discussion on c.l.c++.m about *not*
  > doing this by testing against the include guards used in the headers in
  > question. If that's the case, and its frowned upon, how else might you do
  > it?
  >
  > I've gotten many differing opinions from coworkers but no clear consensus
  > and was wondering how boosters felt about it.
  >
  > Thanks,
  > Mike
  >
  >
  > Info: http://www.boost.org  Send unsubscribe requests to:
  <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
  >
  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  >
  >
  >

  Info: http://www.boost.org  Send unsubscribe requests to: <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]> 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/