Thread: Undefined symbol when moving (unrelated) variable from source to header

Hello! As the title suggests I'm getting an undefined symbol error from the linker when I try to compile something I coded. I won't paste it all, but I'll try to show you what I believe are the most relevant pieces. So I have
menus.h

Code:

typedef struct menuOps {
	int num;
	char *string[MAXOPS];
} menuOPS;
...
menuOPS op_splash = {4, { "string1" , "string2" , "string3" , "string4" } };

void menu_splash();
void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops);

menus.c

Code:

#include "menus.h"

void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops) {
...
}

void menu_splash() {
...
}

interface.h

Code:

#include <...>
                ...
int splash();
int parseOp();

interface.c

Code:

#include "interface.h"
#include "menus.h"

int splash() {
...
menu(&menu_splash,op_splash);
...
}
int main() { ... }

When compiling interface.c I get this error:

Code:

Undefined symbols:
  "_menu_splash", referenced from:
      _menu_splash$non_lazy_ptr in ccGrWt8C.o
  "_menu", referenced from:
      _splash in ccGrWt8C.o
ld: symbol(s) not found

I've been around this for hours, mostly because I can't understand the following:
If I move the op_splash declaration (line in red) inside menus.c then I don't get this error (Actually I get another one about op_splash not being declared, which is understandable). Does anyone have an idea about what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks

Some of this might not matter, but since I don't have your full source code, here are a few notes on using .h files and multiple source files:

• Always use include guards in your header files. This prevents multiple definition errors.
• Never define a variable (or a function) in a header file. Only define types, and declare variables and functions (prototypes) as extern.
• The order you specify files on the command line for compiling may make a difference in linking depending on the compiler you use.

As it is, you should have op_splash defined in menus.c and only declared in menus.h, like so:

menus.h

Code:

#ifndef menus_h__  // dig these include guards!
#define menus_h__

typedef struct menuOps {
        int num;
            char *string[MAXOPS];
} menuOPS;
...
extern menuOPS op_splash;  // just notify the compiler it exists somewhere, the linker will find it later

void menu_splash();
void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops);

#endif  // menus_h__

menus.c

Code:

#include "menus.h"

menuOPS op_splash = {4, { "string1" , "string2" , "string3" , "string4" } };

void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops) {
...
}

void menu_splash() {
...
}

In menus.h, would it help if you put:

Code:

extern void menu_splash();
extern void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops);

Seems to me there's something missing in the code you are supplying. Can you not create a minimum set of files to exhibit the problem and let us look at it? As I said, don't make us guess.

Originally Posted by nonoob

In menus.h, would it help if you put:

Code:

extern void menu_splash();
extern void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops);

Does one really need extern for function prototypes? I know we (almost) all use them.

Okay, as proof of concept, here is a very simple version of your code with the ...s filled in just enough to get it to compile and do something:

menus.h

Code:

#ifndef menus_h__
#define menus_h__

#define MAXOPS 5

typedef struct menuOps
{
        int num;
        char *string[MAXOPS];
} menuOPS;

extern menuOPS op_splash;

extern void menu_splash();
extern void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops);

#endif  // menus_h__

menus.c

Code:

#include <stdio.h>

#include "menus.h"

menuOPS op_splash = {4, { "string1" , "string2" , "string3" , "string4" } };

void menu(void (*menufunc)(void), menuOPS ops) {
    puts(__func__);
}

void menu_splash() {
    puts(__func__);
}

interface.h

Code:

#ifndef interface_h__
#define interface_h__

extern int splash();
extern int parseOp();

#endif  // interface_h__

interface.c

Code:

#include <stdio.h>

#include "interface.h"
#include "menus.h"

int splash()
{
    puts(__func__);
    menu(&menu_splash,op_splash);
    return 42;
}

int main()
{
    printf("Result of splash is: %d\n", splash());
    return 0;
}

I can compile this fine, no errors or warnings, using "gcc -Wall interface.c menu.c". What compiler are you using? Can you post the smallest amount of code that demonstrates this problem (i.e. fill in the ...s enough for the compilation to break on my system). I'm about to head off to lunch but should be back in an hour.

Originally Posted by k16

The problem is, after making the changes you suggested, I just got an increased number of undefined symbols:

No offense but none of us are mind readers and the real problem is that you are not supplying enough code for us to diagnose your problem.
Yes YOU know what's going on around your little 3 line snippets... we do not.

anduril's a prince...

Aww shucks fellas, you're making me blush

First of all, I want to apologize to all of you guys. I'm very sorry for not replying sooner, had to drive all the way to my hometown because of my mom's birthday

Second, sorry again for not having provided more code nor having filled in the ellipsis' in the snippets (I really didn't have the time for the same reason). I didn't do it in the first place because, although I wasn't properly understanding the error, I was kind of sure it didn't have anything to do with it. As I read somewhere (in the forum guidelines post, probably), I didn't want to bother you with large chunks of code. Believe me guys, ignorantly (does the word even exist? Not a native speaker ) I did it with the best intentions.

Just a note on the problem: I'm currently using a machine running mac os x 10.5.8, and had gcc 4.0.1 version installed . In the meantime I updated gcc (which was a pain as the only safe way I found to do it was by downloading the +4gb Xcode image!) and things just started compiling. Can't reason much about this, other than assuming that something was wrong with my previous installation (?). Anyway, I just wanted to clear things out. And last, thanks a bunch to all of you mike65535, anduril462, nonoob and CommonTater for taking the time to teach me something. Much obliged!

ps: @anduril462: I'm really new here and one might claim I don't have sufficient evidence or even possibly the right to state it, but given the effort you've put into those posts, I'll just have to agree that you sir, are indeed a prince