> So, which one should be used: The symbolic link (Fl/*.h) or
> the hard link
> (FL/*.H)?
>
> I have been using:
>
> #include
>
> Now I am wondering if I should be using the symbolic links instead?
Use the real one.
The symlinks are a workaround for code brought over from Windows ports
that
imacarthur wrote:
>
> On 4 Nov 2008, at 18:09, Maik Beckmann wrote:
>
>> The
>> Fl -> FL
>> *.h -> *.H
>> stuff looks pretty scary to me. I've never encountered such stuff
>> before.
>> Why do we do it?
>
> History. Backwards compatibility.
> In particular, it often allows (badly written) co
imacarthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> On 4 Nov 2008, at 18:09, Maik Beckmann wrote:
>
> > The
> > Fl -> FL
> > *.h -> *.H
> > stuff looks pretty scary to me. I've never encountered such stuff
> > before.
> > Why do we do it?
>
> History. Backwards compatibility.
> In particular, it
On 4 Nov 2008, at 18:09, Maik Beckmann wrote:
> The
> Fl -> FL
> *.h -> *.H
> stuff looks pretty scary to me. I've never encountered such stuff
> before.
> Why do we do it?
History. Backwards compatibility.
In particular, it often allows (badly written) code ported from win32
or OSX syste
The
Fl -> FL
*.h -> *.H
stuff looks pretty scary to me. I've never encountered such stuff before.
Why do we do it?
Thanks,
-- Maik
___
fltk-dev mailing list
fltk-dev@easysw.com
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
