mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) (10/24/90)
...that Objective-C barfs on the following code:
typedef struct {
long flags; /* marks which fields in this structure are defined */
int x, y; /* obsolete for new window mgrs, but clients */
int width, height; /* should set so old wm's don't mess up */
int min_width, min_height;
int max_width, max_height;
int width_inc, height_inc;
struct {
int x; /* numerator */
int y; /* denominator */
} min_aspect, max_aspect;
int base_width, base_height; /* added by ICCCM version 1 */
int win_gravity; /* added by ICCCM version 1 */
} XSizeHints;
The Objective-C processor tries to name the x-y struct the same thing twice,
causing serious problems. Those used to programming in X will remember the
above code from /mit/lib/X/Xutil.h, in the X11R3/4 distribution.
This causes pains for people trying to use X with Objective-C.
Another problem arises from Object and String, two words defined and used
by both X and Objective-C. My solution? I redefined those two words for
the X stuff, thusly:
#define String XString
#define Object XObject
(include all x files here)
#undef XObject
#undfe XString
(include all objective-c stuff here)
And then use the words XString and XObject when dealing with X.
I reported the first bug to Stepstone a very long time ago (maybe over a
year) but never received either a confirmation, denial or bug fix. Sigh.
-Dave
Dave "mr question" McIntyre | "....say you're thinking about a plate
mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu | of shrimp.....and someone says to
office : 518-276-8633 | you 'plate,' or 'shrimp'......"lerman@stpstn.UUCP (Ken Lerman) (10/24/90)
In article <-T4%8D_@rpi.edu> mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) writes:
->...that Objective-C barfs on the following code:
->
->typedef struct {
-> long flags; /* marks which fields in this structure are defined */
-> int x, y; /* obsolete for new window mgrs, but clients */
-> int width, height; /* should set so old wm's don't mess up */
-> int min_width, min_height;
-> int max_width, max_height;
-> int width_inc, height_inc;
-> struct {
-> int x; /* numerator */
-> int y; /* denominator */
-> } min_aspect, max_aspect;
-> int base_width, base_height; /* added by ICCCM version 1 */
-> int win_gravity; /* added by ICCCM version 1 */
->} XSizeHints;
->
->The Objective-C processor tries to name the x-y struct the same thing twice,
->causing serious problems. Those used to programming in X will remember the
->above code from /mit/lib/X/Xutil.h, in the X11R3/4 distribution.
->
->This causes pains for people trying to use X with Objective-C.
This is a known bug involving the generation of code for anonymous
structures which has been fixed for the next release.
->
->Another problem arises from Object and String, two words defined and used
->by both X and Objective-C. My solution? I redefined those two words for
->the X stuff, thusly:
->
-> #define String XString
-> #define Object XObject
->
-> (include all x files here)
->
-> #undef XObject
-> #undfe XString
->
-> (include all objective-c stuff here)
->
->And then use the words XString and XObject when dealing with X.
Unfortunately, there is no standard naming authority for external
names for C programs. It is small consolation for Stepstone that we
used those names before X. The problem becomes more severe when you
are using libraries with conflicting names and you don't have the
source. That is not a problem with either X or Stepstone's
Objective-C Libraries.
The approach you've mentioned is roughly what we recommend.
->
->I reported the first bug to Stepstone a very long time ago (maybe over a
->year) but never received either a confirmation, denial or bug fix. Sigh.
You should have received a confirmation.
->
-> -Dave
->
->Dave "mr question" McIntyre | "....say you're thinking about a plate
->mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu | of shrimp.....and someone says to
->office : 518-276-8633 | you 'plate,' or 'shrimp'......"
I speak the truth, but without the official blessing of Stepstone in
this matter.
Kencox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox) (10/26/90)
In article <-T4%8D_@rpi.edu> mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) writes: >I reported the first bug to Stepstone a very long time ago (maybe over a >year) but never received either a confirmation, denial or bug fix. Sigh. I hate it when...(1) when a company spokesman makes excuses and (2) when Stepstone, the company I'm a spokesman for, fumbles and situations like this arise. I have passed your note to the group responsible for customer support, who will investigate why we failed in this case. Perhaps this will insure that the failure does not recur in the future. Our policy is that all calls are to be followed up. I didn't respond to the specific complaint in your note (i.e. that typedef struct { ...; struct { } a,b; ...} ... doesn't work properly, because I wasn't even aware of it myself. Are you using our compiler, or NeXT's? The #define String XString; ... #undef String trick is handy, and something I've has to resort to myself occasionally. In fact, as I recall, at one time or another either X or SunWindows had a variable named 'id' that I 'cured' with the same trick. Thanks for posting it. I'll try to get it added to future releases of the reference manual. -- Brad Cox; cox@stepstone.com; CI$ 71230,647; 203 426 1875 The Stepstone Corporation; 75 Glen Road; Sandy Hook CT 06482
mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) (10/27/90)
cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox) writes: >In article <-T4%8D_@rpi.edu> mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) writes: >>I reported the first bug to Stepstone a very long time ago (maybe over a >>year) but never received either a confirmation, denial or bug fix. Sigh. >I hate it when...(1) when a company spokesman makes excuses and (2) when >Stepstone, the company I'm a spokesman for, fumbles and situations like >this arise. It's ok, I'm just glad it's going to get fixed. That's all. > >I didn't respond to the specific complaint in your note (i.e. that typedef >struct { ...; struct { } a,b; ...} ... doesn't work properly, because I >wasn't even aware of it myself. > >Are you using our compiler, or NeXT's? Yours, on a Sparcstation and a Sun 3. -Dave Dave "mr question" McIntyre | "....say you're thinking about a plate mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu | of shrimp.....and someone says to office : 518-276-8633 | you 'plate,' or 'shrimp'......"
thomas%apgraph@ap542.UUCP (Thomas Oeser (SNI AP 153)) (10/29/90)
Hi, We are programming with Objective-C and X-Window already for a while now and we hit the same problems. Here our solutions: In article <-T4%8D_@rpi.edu>, mcintyre@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) writes: |> |> ... stuff deleted ... |> |> struct { |> int x; /* numerator */ |> int y; /* denominator */ |> } min_aspect, max_aspect; |> int base_width, base_height; The only thing that helps here is to double the definition as follows struct _Aspect { int x; /* numerator */ int y; /* denominator */ } min_aspect; struct _Aspect max_aspect; |> |> Another problem arises from Object and String, two words defined and |> used by both X and Objective-C. Basically, I believe that Objective-C and everybody(thing) else should name its root node more specific, since "Object" is to easy to be used by somebody else. Thomas Oeser *********** DISCLAIMER: All opinions stated here are strictly my own ***** -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: thomas%apgraph%ap542@ztivax.siemens.com Europe: thomas%apgraph%ap542@ztivax.UUCP UUCP: ...!uunet!mcsun!unido!ztivax!ap542!apgraph!thomas Phone: + 49 89 636 47537 Fax: + 49 89 636 45522 Postal Mail: Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems AG, AP 153, Carl-Wery-Str. 22, D-8000 Munich 83, West Germany --------------------------------------------------------------------------