Just use forwarding:
struct ROI; // don't include the full definition here
class ImageSpec {
...
ImageSpec (const ROI &roi); // don't include the implementation
here
...
};
But I'm not convinced you need an ImageSpec constructor for this, or that ROI
needs to make its way all the way to imageio.h. ImageSpec is just a simple
struct, really. Why not just make a utility function local to where you define
and use ROI (imagebuf.h? imagebufalgo.h?) that modifies an ImageSpec to set its
bounds to that of a ROI? We don't provide ImageSpec constructors that let you
set every possible field; the code just does that "by hand" when necessary.
On Jun 19, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Stefan Stavrev wrote:
> I need a constructor ImageSpec(const ROI &roi, int nchans, int alpha_chan).
> The problem is, ImageSpec class is in imageio.h and ROI class is in
> imagebuf.h, and imageio.h includes imagebuf.h. So, ROI is not visible in
> imageio.h and you can't include imagebuf.h in imageio.h, because of cyclic
> dependency.
>
> Why not create a separate header for ImageSpec? There is already a separate
> .cpp called formatspec.cpp.
>
> If we can't do that, how should I handle this constructor? I could provide 6
> parameters xbegin, xend, ... instead of ROI but that would be ugly.
>
--
Larry Gritz
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Oiio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
