[Insight-developers] RE: Complex vs f2c.h, "real" symbol conflicts in gcc 2.95

[Miller, James V (Research)]

Building with system vxl is important to me.  Especially with gcc 2.95/2.96.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: insight-developers-bounces+millerjv=crd.ge.com at itk.org
[mailto:insight-developers-bounces+millerjv=crd.ge.com at itk.org]On Behalf
Of Gaetan Lehmann
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 3:29 PM
To: insight-developers at itk.org
Cc: Brad King; William A. Hoffman; Luis Ibanez; Insight Developers List;
Lorensen, William E (Research)
Subject: Re: [Insight-developers] RE: Complex vs f2c.h,"real" symbol
conflicts in gcc 2.95



If you edit all that code, won't it break building with system vxl ?

On Tuesday 07 June 2005 20:01, Brad King wrote:
> Lorensen, William E (Research) wrote:
> > If we edit all of that code, the next time we update from vxl, we'll have
> > to re-edit?
>
> Correct :(
>
> but we could just write a shell script for the upgrade person to use.
>
> -Brad
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brad King [mailto:brad.king at kitware.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 1:26 PM
> > To: Lorensen, William E (Research)
> > Cc: William A. Hoffman; Luis Ibanez; Insight Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [Insight-developers] RE: Complex vs f2c.h,"real" symbol
> > conflicts in gcc 2.95
> >
> > Lorensen, William E (Research) wrote:
> >>Simple solution:
> >>
> >>f2c.h is only included in netlib files and some FEM files.
> >>
> >>I added :
> >>#define real f2cReal
> >>#define complex f2cComplex
> >>
> >>to f2c.h
> >>
> >>and everything is building. I got through vnl and FEM anyway. I'll keep
> >> building. This works because the FEM guys include f2c.h last. The netlib
> >> guys don't include any conflicting stuff anyway.
> >>
> >>I probably should do the #define's only for gcc2.95?
> >
> > If any code ever wants to use both complex and f2c then we have to also
> > #undef real at the right place.  A variant of solution #3 is to just
> > rename real to REAL in f2c.  Since REAL is just as valid as real in
> > fortran, it would not reduce the "readability" of the f2c converted
> > code.  It would also be a very easy search-and-replace change.
> >
> > -Brad
>
> _______________________________________________
> Insight-developers mailing list
> Insight-developers at itk.org
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers