bug-commoncpp
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Compile Error: Windows 2000 - Visual C++ 6 - No Platform SDK - Other


From: David Sugar
Subject: Re: Compile Error: Windows 2000 - Visual C++ 6 - No Platform SDK - Other build Environments
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 07:50:47 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.5 (Macintosh/20050711)

Not at all. I simply have not tested with vc6 without the later platform sdk's for so very long that it is quite possible it is now broken. This sounds like a useful patch.

Conrad T. Pino wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I presume it's well known the HEAD revision doesn't compile with:

        Microsoft Windows 2000
        Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0
        Platform SDK not installed

That being said the fix is minor but I'd like to point an issue
============
File "w32/cc++/config.h" contains:

/**
 * Determine if platform SDK is installed.  Comment this line out
 * if using VS6 without any Platform SDK updates...
 */
#define HAVE_PLATFORMSDK

/**
 * Some sanity checks for platformsdk support based on build env.
 */

#ifndef HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
#if defined(_MSC_VER) && _MSC_VER >= 1300
#define HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
#else
#if defined(__MINGW32__) || defined(__CYGWIN32__)
#undef  HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
#endif
#endif
#endif
============
This part is interesting.  Please note indentation and "-" lines:

#ifndef HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
    #if defined(_MSC_VER) && _MSC_VER >= 1300
        #define HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
- -   #else
- -       #if defined(__MINGW32__) || defined(__CYGWIN32__)
- -           #undef    HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
- -       #endif
    #endif
#endif
============
Since the "-" lines are inoperative the block and be rewritten as:

#if !defined(HAVE_PLATFORMSDK) && defined(_MSC_VER) && _MSC_VER >= 1300
#define HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
#endif
============
Since undefined macros resolve to "0" (zero) in #if then this works:

#if !defined(HAVE_PLATFORMSDK) && _MSC_VER >= 1300
#define HAVE_PLATFORMSDK
#endif
============
Would the above optimizations be outside project standards if proposed
in a patch?

Best regards,

Conrad Pino

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBQw1YbLNM28ubzTo9EQL4cACgqqzQRqXr2BUoYaynyTZdfWfs05YAn1ix
SCkxmH2ZUl2auKEWoVIWCVUK
=gM7X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



_______________________________________________
Bug-commoncpp mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp

Attachment: dyfet.vcf
Description: Vcard


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]