Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 26 Apr 2003 22:17:07 +0200 | From | Thunder Anklin <> | Subject | Re: missing #includes? |
| |
Salut,
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 11:51:19PM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > What's the preferred thing to do here? I would like to see explicit > #includes when symbols are used. Is that what others expect also?
It's perlable. I might do this if you want.
> However, it makes for quite a large list of missing includes.
I suppose this is because it's implicitly included via some other include file. You will need to descend through
#include <blah>
in order to do the right checks.
Thunder [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |