Good Practice With Include Files

**CrazyNorman** · 07-27-2007

I'm writing a library, which has the ability to interoperate with SDL, but in the event that SDL does not exist, is still useful on its own. I want to have it build regardless of whether or not SDL exists, and simply disable functionality.

So far, I have the SDL extensions inside an #ifdef which checks for _SDL_H (SDL.h defines this). I include SDL with the statemene

Code:

#include "SDL.h"

Then, I create a folder, "dummy," in which I have a blank file called "SDL.h" The Makefile adds "dummy" to the build path, but after everything else. That way, if the user adds an -I/usr/include/SDL (or whatever form your operating system works with), it gets built with the SDL extensions, but if not, it builds without them. Is this a bad way of implementing everything?

**Chib** · 07-27-2007

It's not really a bad way, although it'd probably be easier to just have your own definition for SDL.

**robwhit** · 07-27-2007

why not just do this:

Code:

#ifdef MYPROG_SDL_SUPPORT
#include "SDL.h"
#endif

**matsp** · 07-28-2007

Most of the time, what you want to do is "check if there is SDL installed" and set a "CONFIG_HAS_SDL" or some such define on the command-line (or in a "config.h"), so that later on you can do something like:

Code:

#if CONFIG_HAS_SDL
   #include <SDL.h>
#endif
...
#if CONFIG_HAS_SDL
    .... // some SDL-related code
#endif

--
Mats

Thread: Good Practice With Include Files

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Good Practice With Include Files

Similar Threads

2d game

include files that are'nt in compiler's directory

MFC include BS

include library header in header files