> > So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I > don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword > "__complex__" via complex.h, but that's different to just defining > "complex", isn't it? Any ideas? > >
I seem to recall something about complex being a valid type in C99 (the new ansi C spec). > ================ > The second problem seems to be one of policy. I get a warning: > In file included from /usr/include/math.h:33, > from lufactor.c:37: > /usr/include/bits/huge_val.h:37: warning: HUGE_VAL' redefined > machine.h:216: warning: this is the location of the previous definition > > This happens because the source file in question has: >#include "matrix.h" >#include <math.h> > > Meschach header file matrix.h defines HUGE_VAL if it isn't already defined, > while the standard header math.h also defines it. This can of course be > resolved by simply changing the order: >#include <math.h> >#include "matrix.h" > > So my question here is how much of a problem is this? Should it be (or is > it) official policy somewhere that standard headers should always be given > before local headers? > since it checks if it is defined and only defines it if not, then I would flop the two. Is the one the code needs bigger than the system?
