Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Jef Driesen wrote on Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:31:29PM CEST:
CFLAGS=-I${includedir}
#include <libfoo/header.h>
or
CFLAGS=-I${includedir}/libfoo
#include <header.h>
[...]
It's purely a matter of preference. You're right to segregate the
headers, but a project shouldn't mandate one #include/-I style over
another.
I don't really want to mandate a specific style to the users of my
library. I just want to use the first style inside my own library, and
right now that doesn't work.
Good thinking. The first style helps avoid name clashes with generic
header file names.
That's exactly the reason why I wanted to use that style.
Suppose that in one of my public headers, I include one of the other
header files, with <libfoo/headerx.h> style. Now when I compile the
library in my src tree, it fails because there is no such header present
in my src tree or system wide (not installed yet). The same for the
examples.
Can you reorganize your source tree to look more like the installed
tree? IOW, move headers in a subdirectory libfoo or include/libfoo.
The biggest reason against doing so, namely that CVS doesn't track
renames, isn't very relevant any more nowadays.
I can reorganize my source tree anyway I want. I'm using subversion, so
renaming is no problem.
Is there any preference for choosing libfoo or include/libfoo, or is
that just personal taste?
