Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Cycling pound includes check?
This is ok to do as long as your headers are guarded which is 99% of cases for c programming. If you create new header file using CDT it would be guarded by default. 


Fedja Jeleskovic wrote:
I probably wasn't clear on what I was asking. Here is an example to make things more clear. 
File1.h:
#include <File2.h>

File2.h:
#include <File1.h>
Compiler freaks about this and gives quite strange error, but this condition should be easy to spot just the way missing header files are spotted today. 

Hope this is more clear.


Fedja
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Schorn, Markus <Markus.Schorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Markus.Schorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: 

    Hi,
    it is legal and quite normal to include the same file in a
    translation unit mor than once. Issuing a warning about it
    would not be the right thing to do.
    Neither a compiler nor a parser has a reasonable way to check
whether a recursive inclusion is handled properly within the header. It just has to perform the inclusion and 
    typically aborts the process at a certain recursion depth.
Markus. 
        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        *From:* cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
        <mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
        [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
        <mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>] *On Behalf Of *Fedja
        Jeleskovic
        *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2009 8:20 PM
        *To:* CDT General developers list.
        *Subject:* [cdt-dev] Cycling pound includes check?
        *Importance:* Low

        I have been hit several times lately with cycling pound
        includes in the code and unfriendliness of the compiler
        regarding the issues like that. The error shows up at the
        strange place and it takes a while to trace it down just to
        find out that someone included a header file that had it
        already included before.

        Since CDT tells me right away if I have included header file
        that doesn't exist, could this circular check be added as
        well. From the high level it doesn't seem hard to do so, but
        things could be different down below.

        Let me know!

        Thanks.

        Fedja


    _______________________________________________
    cdt-dev mailing list
    cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev


------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev

Back to the top