jwlamb at ncsu.edu
Sun Mar 7 21:11:11 CET 2004
On Mar 5, 2004, at 2:03 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, John Lamb wrote:
>> While you're branching, could you please replace all instances of exp)
>> exp, and exp- with exp2) exp2, and exp2- respectively in
>> extra/expr~/vexp.c and vexp_if.c? Also add "#include <unistd.h>" to
>> the #ifdef UNIX block of src/x_misc.c? I'm tired of patching these 3
>> files every time I compile a new CVS of Pd. ;)
>> Good work by the way; the console is hot! Icons are nice, too. :)
> Sorry, but why am I supposed to fix those exp's, and why hasn't it been
> already done?
The exp's cause a name conflict to occur -- the "shadowed declaration"
error that causes the compile to stop on gcc3.3 (possibly newer
versions) unless you delete "-Werror" in the extras/expr~/Makefile. By
simply changing all instances of "exp" that cause the conflict to
"exp2" or really any other name, the conflict is resolved, you can
leave in -Werror, and unless I am crazy, all my patches that use
fexpr~, expr~ and expr still work just fine.
On the one hand, it may not be your _job_ to fix this, and really it
is something for the whole project. There is a possibility that I am
stupid and that there is a more "proper" fix for this, but this works
for me, and it eliminates an error that confuses many Pd compiling
newbies. I don't know why the fix hasn't already been commited --
perhaps the guys with cvs commit priv's don't run a gcc that complains
about this error?
> I've made your other change though.
Thanks again, and impd is cool.
More information about the Pd-list