[osg-users] FW: osg submissions??

[Andy Skinner]

I think the unusual usage is just that we're not using gcc.

What about if, instead of include stdlib.h et al, I put in statements
like "using std::atof;"?  Would those sorts of things be bad in a
widely-included header?

Although I can probably find some other headers, it seems to me like
they'd be arbitrarily chosen.  The GLExtensions one, for example, just
doesn't seem to me to be the right place, except that around half of the
files include it.

For the moment, I'm going to try switching the includes to some using
statements, and see how it gets along.

andy

-----Original Message-----
From: osg-users-bounces at lists.openscenegraph.org
[mailto:osg-users-bounces at lists.openscenegraph.org] On Behalf Of Robert
Osfield
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 3:58 PM
To: osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
Subject: Re: [osg-users] FW: osg submissions??

Hi Andy,

I think placing the extra includes in Export is a bridge too far in
terms to forcing everybody, even if they don't need it.  I have merged
the other two changes as these are benign.

The code which you are having problems is all stuff that has been
around for years and years and tested across many platforms by
thousands of users without issue, until now... this suggest that your
particular usage model is rather unusual.  Since its so unusual we
really have to avoid all other users paying for a workaround for one
unique usage combination, this means avoid increasing compile times,
it also means not placing hacks into places there could confuse users
about the role of various headers.

Now modifying dozens of .cpp's files isn't ideal as its very spraying
the sent everywhere, putting into the topmost header is bad practice
too.  I think one could choose far more wisely the headers or cpp's
that you need to modify by looking at the patterns of what .cpp's you
need to modify and why.  Are there common patterns?

Also is there any compiler directives you could use, rather than
modify the code to work around what is basically a unusual build
setup.

Robert.

On 7/23/07, Andy Skinner <Andy.Skinner at mathworks.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Oh, sorry, I thought we had the new list, and it actually came back to
me.
>
>
>
> If I can post here (attached message with attached file) in the
meantime,
> here is what I submitted.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> andy
>
>
>
>  ________________________________
>
>
> From: osg-users-bounces at lists.openscenegraph.org
> [mailto:osg-users-bounces at lists.openscenegraph.org] On
> Behalf Of Robert Osfield
>  Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 12:21 PM
>  To: osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
>  Subject: Re: [osg-users] FW: osg submissions??
>
>
>
>
> On 7/23/07, Andy Skinner <Andy.Skinner at mathworks.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> I sent something on Friday to
> osg-submissions at openscenegraph.org, and got it back in the
> mail.
>
>
> This was on the old server, so went the way of the dodo.
>
>  The new lists will be
> osg-submissions at lists.openscenegraph.org
>
>
> but I'm awaiting Dreamhosts fixing problems at their end before this
lists
> goes live.
>
>
>
> I haven't seen a response yet, but hopefully it'll be considered soon.
>
>
>
>  All posts to the old lists since Thursday will be gone, and now way
to
> recover so I'm afraid you'll need to repost to the osg-users or the
new
> osg-submissions lists once it goes live.
>
>  Robert.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Andy Skinner" <Andy.Skinner at mathworks.com>
> To: <osg-submissions at openscenegraph.org>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 13:11:01 -0400
> Subject: [Osg-submissions] FW: another try at stdlib fixes
>
>
>
>
> I sent this late Wednesday, and don't know if it was seen.
>
>
>
> thanks
>
> andy
>
>
>
>  ________________________________
>
>
> From: Andy Skinner
>  Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:44 PM
>  To: 'Bug fixes, enhancements, code changes for OSG'
>  Subject: another try at stdlib fixes
>
>
>
> Robert, this file has a different approach.
>
>
>
> Almost everything includes include/osg/Export.  It already has some
general
> stuff in there, so I included stdlib.h, stdio.h, and string.h there.
I
> assume this will also be slower, but it seems to work.
>
>
>
> There were a couple of changes to other files.  I added limits.h and
> stdlib.h to src/osgDB/FileNameUtils.cpp (I don't know why I had to add
> stdlib.h, because I think it gets Export, too).  I added string.h to
> src/osgPlugins/txp/trpage_swap.cpp, which didn't use any
> OSG includes.
>
>
>
> What do you think?  Far fewer files explicitly changed, but more
impact
> (just about everybody gets Export).
>
>
>
> We just use std::atof(), etc, as a routine here.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> andy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org mailing list
> osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org at lists.openscenegraph.org
>
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegr
aph.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> osg-users mailing list
> osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
>
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.or
g
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.or
g