At 05:37 pm 31/05/99 +0200, you wrote: >>Adrian: Of course, the wrapper classes need to accept a standard calling >>method! :) We need to decide what calls are needed and what the syntax >>should be for them before anyone starts on creating these classes. Although >>the calling syntax should be fairly easy to change later, best to get it >>right the first time. > >Adrian, > > I usually do this by writing a class (i.e. the header file) without doing >the actual implementation (the .cpp source file). This way, I have >something to show and if it's accepted I don't have to code it as it's >already finished. Some proposal like that would be necessary first. > >Cheers, >-- M. Uli Kusterer Yep. Even better. Write a standard header with different definitions for each platform.
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows programer. Adrian Sutton
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows programer... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows programer... Adrian Sutton
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows progr... Dylan Just
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows p... DeRobertis
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windo... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ ... Dylan Just
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compile... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows programer... Adrian Sutton
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows progr... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows programer... Adrian Sutton
- Re: OODL: OODL - Windows compiler?/ windows programer... Adrian Sutton
