Re: [boost] [asio] header order dependence with <windows.h>
Christopher Kohlhoff wrote:
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 21:50:09 +0200, "Yuval Ronen" <ronen_yuval@yahoo.com> said:
Yes, and to solve it I strongly suggest that you define WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN as a global define for all you translation units. It removes most of the junk inside windows.h, including winsock.h, as far as I remember.
Yes, that is a good idea.
Sorry, but I don't think so. 1) This issue will continuously frustrate new users, like it was with Serialization lib. 2) boost goal is to provide libraries that can be candidates to inclusion into the standard. I can not imagine that order of standard headers inclusion would affect my program well-formedness. It means that while the issue under discussion is not resolved - asio can not be targeted as a proposal for inclusion into the std. and it leads to the conclusion that it doesn't conform to boost goals. sad... 3) I can not see why you need to include all these platform dependent definitions in each header file. I believe that applying some kind of Bridge pattern would help to localize these platform dependent definitions/declarations in .cpp files only. 4) I understand that it is not an easy task and it is up to yours to consider my opinion, but I would appreciate if you include this issue into your TODO list. Best, Oleg Abrosimov
Олег Абросимов wrote:
1) This issue will continuously frustrate new users, like it was with Serialization lib.
So it will and already does. Personally, I blame Microsoft.
2) boost goal is to provide libraries that can be candidates to inclusion into the standard. I can not imagine that order of standard headers inclusion would affect my program well-formedness. It doesn't. <windows.h> is not a standard header, and currently the main issue is including <windows.h> before ASIO headers. It means that while the issue under discussion is not resolved - asio can not be targeted as a proposal for inclusion into the std. and it leads to the conclusion that it doesn't conform to boost goals. sad...
I disagree. The header order dependency is not something inherent to the ASIO library. If ASIO were to become a standard, then this platform-specific issue would be for the compiler vendor to resolve. For example, MS might have to break back compatibility by not getting the <winsock.h> stuff by default in <windows.h> unless a compiler switch is enabled.
3) I can not see why you need to include all these platform dependent definitions in each header file. I believe that applying some kind of Bridge pattern would help to localize these platform dependent definitions/declarations in .cpp files only.
ASIO is a header-only library. There are no .cpp files to hide implementation in. It's one of the downsides of header-only libraries.
4) I understand that it is not an easy task and it is up to yours to consider my opinion, but I would appreciate if you include this issue into your TODO list.
I don't see anything that can be done about it. The WinAPI headers are order-dependent. I don't see what a library can do to change that. Sebastian Redl
participants (2)
-
Sebastian Redl -
Олег Абросимов