Hmm, but it appears to me that the compile is not finding GET_PIXEL8/16/32
AT ALL; the problem looks like it's with GET_PIXEL8/16/32 itself, not with
expanding GET_PIXEL? No? Am I just smoking dope? It doesn't report any
errors with expanding GET_PIXEL. It reports errors with finding the
symbols GET_PIXEL8/16/32, which seems to my little mind to mean that the
preprocessor is not interpreting GET_PIXEL8/16/32, leaving them for the
compiler proper?...or am I just getting myself really confused?
If GCC can't find GET_PIXEL8/16/32 at all, why could it find them any
better if they were called from a different location?
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Ron Goldman wrote:
> When you compile rfbproto.c it includes the hextile.c file 3 times,
> each time with the macro BPP defined differently (BPP = 8, 16 or 32).
> hextile.c then defines a macro GET_PIXEL so that it expands as
> GET_PIXEL8, GET_PIXEL16 or GET_PIXEL32, which is normally finally
> expanded with the values defined in rfbproto.c.
>
> On the Mac for some reason that last expansion is not happening, so I
> am suggesting manually expanding the GET_PIXEL macro in hextile.c the
> one place that it is used. Since you need to do this for all three BPP
> values you need to create 3 versions of hextile.c.
>
> If you look at rfbproto.c you'll see the 3 places it includes
> hextile.c: change those.
> In hextile.c, search for the sole "call" to GET_PIXEL in the code and
> change that.
>
> So in hextile8.c you'll have " ... for (i = 0; i < nSubrects; i++) {
> GETPIXEL8(fg,ptr); ..."
>
> Hope that makes it clear enough.
>
> -- Ron --
>
>
> On Sunday, June 1, 2003, at 02:38 PM, Jessica Blank wrote:
>
> > Hi there! Finally, a real response. OK, pardon my ignorance, but I am
> > not
> > familiar with the issues surrounding preprocessor macros. I do not see
> > exactly what you are asking me to do? Replace the macros with ... what?
> >
> > I was thinking earlier that if there was a way I could simply
> > reimplement
> > GET_PIXEL8, etc. as FUNCTONS rather than macros...
> >
> > Could you clarify a bit? What exactly would forking off three versions
> > of
> > hextile.c do?
> >
> > On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Ron Goldman wrote:
> >
> >> Try compiling rfbproto.c with the -E switch to view just the output
> >> from the preprocessor. Since GET_PIXEL8, etc. are macros if you see
> >> them in the output file then the problem is that the preprocessor is
> >> not expanding them correctly for some reason.
> >>
> >> A very crude hack in that case is to just make 3 copies of the file
> >> hextile.c (hextile8.c, hextile16.c & hextile32.c) and edit them so
> >> that
> >> the call to GET_PIXEL is GET_PIXEL8, 16 or 32. Then edit rfbproto.c so
> >> the 3 includes of hextile.c use the modified files.
> >>
> >> Good luck.
> >>
> >> -- Ron --
> >>
> >> p.s. personally I use tightvnc and find that the Java applet turned
> >> into a Mac OS X app is plenty fast enough, though it does take a while
> >> to start up.
> >>
> >
> > J e s s i c a L e a h B l a n k
> >
>
J e s s i c a L e a h B l a n k
_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
