Re: Compile Errors with Carbon Versu BSD Dynamic Library
Re: Compile Errors with Carbon Versu BSD Dynamic Library
- Subject: Re: Compile Errors with Carbon Versu BSD Dynamic Library
- From: Mike Jackson <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:42:35 -0400
Figured out that "check" is already defined somewhere in Carbon.h or
the files that it includes. So I used a #undef check just after the
#includes and now it seems to compile.
On a related note, is there a compile time "#def" that I can evaluate
against to figure out if I am compiling against the Carbon libs or
should I just define my own in this particular build configuration?
Mike Jackson
On Jul 11, 2005, at 9:31 PM, Mike Jackson wrote:
I have a current Xcode 2.1 project that I created as a "BSD Dynamic
Library". Now I would like to start adding some carbon calls into
the library so after some trials just decided to make a new
project. The problem I am having is that the same code that
compiles in the BSD project throws errors in the carbon project.
Specifically here is the error:
/Users/mjackson/Projects/CarbonTest/NullPolicy.h:39: error:
expected unqualified-id before '{' token
/Users/mjackson/Projects/CarbonTest/NullPolicy.h:56: error:
expected unqualified-id before '{' token
At the bottom of this email is the complete NullPolicy.h file. I am
using gcc 4.0 and can not figure out what the difference between
the BSD Library Project and the Carbon Library Project, besides the
obvious differences of the linking against the Carbon.framework.
Could some one throw me a bone and suggest what might be the
problem? I am still "wet behind the ears" when it comes to C++.
Thanks for the help.
---BEGIN FILE NullPolicy.h----
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
//
// Copyright (c) 2002, Perry L. Miller IV
// All rights reserved.
// BSD License: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.html
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
//
// Policy classes regarding null pointers.
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
#ifndef _USUL_POINTERS_NULL_POLICY_H_
#define _USUL_POINTERS_NULL_POLICY_H_
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
//
// Policy class that permits null pointers.
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
struct NullOkPolicy
{
template < class T > static void check ( const T *t ){} // <----
This Line
};
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
//
// Policy class that does not permit null pointers.
//
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
template
<
class ErrorPolicy_
>
struct NullBadPolicy
{
template < class T > static void check ( const T *t )
{
// This may look like redundancy, however, we do not know how
many cpu
// cycles it takes to construct the error-policy. Further, this
permits
// us to easily insert a breakpoint.
if ( 0x0 == t )
ErrorPolicy_ ( 1075270902, false, "Null pointer" );
}
};
#endif // _USUL_POINTERS_NULL_POLICY_H_
---END FILE----
---
Mike Jackson
mike _at_ bluequartz dot net
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40bluequartz.net
This email sent to email@hidden
---
Mike Jackson
mike _at_ bluequartz dot net
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden