[comp.windows.interviews] prebeta

mra@UU.PSI.COM (Michael Almond) (04/16/91)

	I'm working on building the IV 3.0 with g++ and have gotten stuck
on  xwindow.c.  Is appears there is a type called 'HintFunction' used on line
857:

void ivManagedWindowRep  ::do_set(ivWindow  * window, HintFunction f) {

Here is the compiler error:

g++  +p         -Dcplusplus_2_0  -Dsigned= -Dvolatile= -DLANGUAGE_C   -I..    -I
../../../.././src/include   -I/usr/local/lib/g++-include    -c ../xwindow.c
../xwindow.c:857: warning: type specifier omitted for parameter
../xwindow.c:857: parse error before `f'
expecting: ')'
../xwindow.c:857: argument list for `do_set' does not match any in class
../xwindow.c: In method void ivManagedWindowRep::do_set (...):
../xwindow.c:858: `window' undeclared (first use this function)
../xwindow.c:858: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
../xwindow.c:858: for each function it appears in.)
../xwindow.c:870: `f' undeclared (first use this function)


I've grep'd on all the header dir's and IV dir's and can't find this anywhere.

-- 
Michael R. Almond (Georgia Tech Alumnus)          mra@srchtec.uucp (registered)
search technology, inc.				            mra@searchtech.com
4725 peachtree corners cir., suite 200		             uupsi!srchtec!mra
norcross, georgia 30092				        (404) 441-1457 (office)
[search]: Systems Engineering Approaches to Research and Development

linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton) (04/17/91)

In article <m0jSYPx-000A8SC@jester.srchtec.uucp>, srchtec!mra@UU.PSI.COM (Michael Almond) writes:
|> 
|> 	I'm working on building the IV 3.0 with g++ and have gotten stuck
|> on  xwindow.c.  Is appears there is a type called 'HintFunction' used on line
|> 857:
|> 
|> void ivManagedWindowRep  ::do_set(ivWindow  * window, HintFunction f) {

The line in include/IV-X11/windowrep.h
 
    typedef boolean (ManagedWindowRep::*HintFunction)(ManagedWindowHintInfo&);

defines HintFunction as a pointer-to-member-function for ManagedWindowRep.
g++ must be getting confused.  If you figure out a syntax that is less confusing to it,
let me know and I'll make the change here.