If this causes problems on any compiler, please report a bug to
http://bugzilla.libsdl.org/
and include the platform and version of compiler you're using.
fuzzyTew@gmail.com 2009-03-14 15:18:45 PDT
patch to change HAVE_ICONV to HAVE_ICONV_H
There are two separate iconv checks in configure -- one for the header file and
one for the library. include/SDL_stdinc.h uses the library define to see
whether or not it should reference the types defined in the header, which
naturally breaks if the library exists and the header does not.
Description From esigra 2008-01-07 16:20:21 (-) [reply]
I try to get a clean compile for a project using SDL. But I get warnings
from SDL headers when I use -Wold-style-cast. This is especially bad
because I plan to build the software with -Werror=old-style-cast when we
have switched over to GCC 4.2, which has that option.
But this problem can be fixed in the SDL headers. I checked out the SVN
version and made some patches. See the attached patch.
* Some math functions become intrinsic in release mode, so we need to
convert all the math functions into SDL math functions, like we did
with the stdlib functions.
* Constant initializers of 8-bit values become calls to memset() in
release mode, but memset() itself is an intrinsic when explicitly
called. So we'll just explicitly call memset() in those cases.
I'm not entirely happy with them. Maybe the right way to go is to leave
SDL_iconv() taking a non-const inbuf? How often are we converting const
strings anyway?
The current SVN trunk is missing the SDLCALL specifier at numerous locations.
It has to be added for all (possibly user provided) callbacks.
I stumbled over this while creating a makefile for the OpenWatcom compiler for
Win32.
[I'm fixing this for the public headers, but I'm not going to bother for the SDL library code (yet)]
To clarify: Normaly, GCC (or, to be precise, the preprocessor) will ignore
this, and compile the code happily. However, one can specify -Wundef to get a
warning about this.
One can probably argue whether to consider this a bug or not; but I think that
(a) from a semantic point of view, using "#if FOO" when FOO is not defined is
strange, and (b) since it is possible to trigger a warning about this, and a
trivial fix exists, it should be corrected.
I can think of two alternative patches, BTW:
1) Simply use #define HAVE_FOO 0, instead of not defining HAVE_FOO at all
2) Change
#if HAVE_FOO
to
#if HAVE_FOO+0
which always does the right thing.
But I think I still prefer the attached patch :-).
