Hi Wayne, On 29 March 2019 22:30:27 GMT, Wayne Stambaugh <stambau...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't know if I want to force this even though I think it's a good > idea. So few of the source files in KiCad adhere to this that it would > confuse new developers. However, devs should be aware of the issue.
Sure, it's more of an note than a requirement: "any header that comes first must implicitly satisfy all its dependencies (in the context of that compilation unit)". It wasn't intended as a policy requirement. Indeed, as it's possible to include headers with different combinations of include paths and defines depending on where you make the include, it is no guarantee that the header is unbreakable in all places. I agree we should not make requirements that do not match the majority practice in KiCad. Cheers, John _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
