Re: OB 4.2.0: Shooting <winsock.h> trouble...

Hi Martin,

On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 03:15:26PM +0100, Martin Simmons wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:15:39 -0230, Dion Picco <[email protected]> said:
> 
>   Dion> On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 02:44:33PM +0200, André Borrmann wrote:
>   >> 
>   >> Hello OB Users,
>   >> 
>   >> I'm using Orbacus on Windows (VC7) and recently update 
>   >> from version 4.1.3 to
>   >> 4.2.0. The Orbacus developers have choosen to use <winsock2.h> instead of
>   >> <winsock.h>, as you can see in OB/Net.h and OB/WinConfig.h. 
>   >> This can produce some trouble if you use another library which 
>   >> includes <winsock.h>, as it was in my case. You can walk around this 
>   >> problem if you rearrange the order of includes in your own files: 
>   >> the orbacus-includes first, the others afterwards...
>   >> 
>   >> Regards,
>   >> 
>   >> André
> 
>   Dion> Thanks for the tip.  We've had other people have similar problems with
>   Dion> other include files as well.  I think the best practice to keep 
>   Dion> in mind is to include the Orbacus headers first as a rule.  
>   Dion> There may be exceptions to this but usually this works out good.
> 
> I'm puzzled about why the user-level Orbacus headers include winsock at all.
> The implementation of the socket layer in Orbacus would clearly need it, but
> surely the CORBA code that users write doesn't?
> 
> __Martin

Well, there are a couple of things to consider here:

1. For basic Orbacus user-level headers you're right - winsock2
shouldn't be included directly.  I suspect a dependency is hanging
around here somewhere and when I get the time I will try to figure out
where exactly.  I suspect something is including Net.h which is
including something else which is including... you get the idea. ;)

2. As a sourcecode product, we really can't make assumptions as to which
headers people will include.  People are free to include anything and
cast classes around to whatever they like.  Such a case as this will be 
impossible for us to guard against the inclusion of system headers.

I don't know whether Andr falls into category 1 or 2.  However I suspect that 
category 1 still exists and will be examined in the future to remove the
dependency.

-- 
Dion Picco, Software Engineer
IONA Technologies Inc.
Team Orbacus - Your CORBA Source
mailto:[email protected]
http://www.orbacus.com
_______________________________________________
OB-Users Mailing List - [email protected]
http://mail.ooc.nf.ca/mailman/listinfo/ob-users
Visit our support FAQ before you send a message.
http://www.orbacus.com/faq/support.html