On 12/01/11 14:08, Howard Butler wrote:
On Jan 12, 2011, at 4:45 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
However, the best option is to follow Boost guidelines. The min/max
are very popular as macros, not only on Windows but defined by
various software packages, so personally, I prefer the extra () as
most portable option.
This is what I did to fix things, although I find it makes the code a
bit messy. It probably would be better to rename the functions that
I can to minimum() and maximum() (all of liblas::Bounds, for
example).
IMHO, it's not libLAS problem. It's users problem to make compiler happy
in presence of polluting headers like Windows API headers.
If write a software using 3rd-parties, for instance GDAL, and I code
something along these lines which does not compile, obviously:
#include <gdal.h>
enum MyBoolean { TRUE, FALSE };
int main()
{
return 0;
}
Should I ask GDAL team to fix it or it is my problem?
The same question applies to libLAS.
Though, it would be good to keep libLAS purified, even if some thinking
and planning ahead is required.
Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Member of ACCU, http://accu.org
_______________________________________________
Liblas-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/liblas-devel
