Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
I tried compiling this on unix, and it worked fine. So I believe the problem is
likely that some windows header file somewhere is defining min. This post
suggests
it's windows.h:
https://www-old.cae.wisc.edu/pipermail/octave-maintainers/2007-February/001812.html
But it's hard for me to believe you wouldn't have seen this problem before,
because
other code -- perhaps code you've written -- must include windows.h as well! So
maybe it's somewhere else?
Try this: edit src/windows/google/sparseconfig.h, and after the line
#include <windows.h>
add the lines
#undef min
#undef max
Does this fix the problem for you?
Original comment by csilv...@gmail.com
on 24 Feb 2009 at 7:22
Hi,
Your correction fixed the problem. We hadn't the problem before because we never
include windows.h. Moreover, i've seen that it is in windef.h (included from
windows.h ) that min and max macros are defined.
Thank you very much
Laurent
Original comment by L.VanMiegroet
on 25 Feb 2009 at 10:21
Hmm, I'm not sure what to do about this. I can't just #undef min in my .h file,
since folks may write windows programs that legitimately depend on the 'min' in
winbase.h. I don't want their code to break when they include one of the
sparsehash
header files.
On the other hand, sparsehash needs some of the code in windows.h to work
properly.
The basic problem is that a fundamental windows header file defines macros with
common names like min and max; but there's nothing we can do about that now.
:-( I
think you may have to just keep the #undef min as a local change. I'll look
into
whether there's anything better we can do.
Original comment by csilv...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 8:34
On further investigation, it looks like sparsehash doesn't need windows.h after
all.
So I just removed the #include entirely. This should be fixed in the next version
of sparsehash.
Original comment by csilv...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2009 at 8:42
This should be fixed in sparsehash 1.5, just released.
Original comment by csilv...@gmail.com
on 7 May 2009 at 3:10
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
L.VanMiegroet
on 24 Feb 2009 at 4:30Attachments: