"Murray Cumming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
>
> > 1) what is broken that needs fixing
>
> Unfortunately the coder currently requires 2 -I arguments:
> -I<prefix>/include *and* -I/<prefix>/include/xercesc, because the
> xercesc headers themselves do not mention 'xercesc' in their headers.
>
> > 2) how would moving the includes to include/xercesc fix it
>
> It would make the include directory inside the distribution resemble the
> include directory created by 'make install', and allow me to change the
> internal #includes to <xercesc/whateverwastherebefore>. Client code
> would then build with just -I<prefix>/include (or maybe no -I at all if
> that's the default gcc include path). Xerces-C would then seem a little
> bit more sane.
>
> >
> > 3) what are the drawbacks
>
> People may have to change their -I argument. But *every* developer has
> to change their build directives for *each* release anyway, because the
> library name changes every time. So this will not be a shock.
OK. This seems more clear now. Since make install is already placing the
header files under include/xercesc/* it's silly that user apps have to
reference both -Iinclude and -Iinclude/xercesc just because the header
files don't use #include <xercesc/header.h>
+1 from me
jas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
