On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 07:12:28AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Am Fre, 2001-09-28 um 19.15 schrieb 1001697323: > > Do you think this is a "logical" way to do this?? Or this is weird? > Well, this is the way imake applied (still applies ?). > > IMHO, it is weird, error-prone and hard to maintain :) (No punt > intended). > > What I do in such cases is either to > * Apply a similar layout as Guido mentioned. > Pros: Simple source-tree layout > Cons: You would have to redesign your existing header hierarchy, files > are not safe against accidentially includeing private headers from > public ones. > > * Layout your include directory hierarchy as it would be after > installation, i.e. put all public headers below include/.. applying the > same layout as the final layout would have, eg. > include/prodesk/<someheader>.h > Pros: Proper separation of public and private headers, safe against > accidental inclusion of private headers. > Cons: Somewhat more complex source-tree layout.
Ok, this one is the "same" as I said, but without symbolic links. So, why not use them? A simple script would populate the include/ directory with them... This way, I can have the sources and headers together (which are always called the same... i.e. string.cpp and string.h), and also, have it working. Thanks. > > For larger projects and for projects with long development cycles, I > personally prefer the second way of doing it, for small project it > actually doesn't matter. > > Just my 0.02 Euros > > Ralf > > -- Make a better partition table: http://www.jmmv.f2s.com/ept Julio Merino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: 18961975
msg04129/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
