On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Ms2ger <ms2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > One issue I only thought of today: this means that Source2.cpp can use all > headers included into Source1.cpp–until enough files are added between > Source1 and Source2 that Source2 ends up in the next unified file. This > hasn't been much of an issue for autogenerated C++, but it seems like it > could be harder to get right with hand-written C++. > > One way around it would be not to unify sources in automation. On one hand, > this could cause more bustage when changes that built locally turn out not > to have enough includes; on the other, it might be better than having to fix > up a dozen unrelated files whenever you add a new one.
This sounds like a huge problem to me. There's also the problem that some header files, in particular on windows, add macros which can wreck havoc in our cpp files. This happened recently with our autogenerated C++ files where adding a .webidl file pushed a .cpp file from going from one unified file to the next. This .cpp file pulled in one of these windows headers. The result was that now a whole new set of files were exposed to the windows macros and some of them broke. This was a huge headache and I know that one of the solutions that were seriously considered was to rename the new .webidl file from foopy.webidl to zzfoopy.webidl. / Jonas _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
