Thread: [Opentnl-general] Function 'new' redefinition
Brought to you by:
mark_frohnmayer,
s_alanet
From: Mark P N. <Mark@Neyersoftware.com> - 2004-05-12 21:00:50
|
Hi, it's me again with another question. I'm working on adding TNL to the game engine that I'm making, and when I go to complile after adding the line '#include <tnl.h>, it tells me that the function 'void *operator new(size_t,void*) already has a body, which has been definted in (MSFT Visual Studio.NET)\Vc7\include\new. I looked at this definition, as well as the definition of new in 'tnlTypes.h', and they appeared to be the exact same thing. I commented out the function definition in tnlTypes.h and then told it to #include<new> right there instead, and everything compiled fine. I haven't actually made the TNL code /do /anything yet, so I can't be sure if this ruins functionality. Is there any reason why 'new' was defined outside of the TNL namespace? As an aside question, this is my first time joining any sort of open source development mailing list. Am I asking the 'right kind' of questions and is this the right place to ask them ? I'd hate to be annoying everyone on the list ... Mark P Neyer |
From: Mark F. <ma...@ga...> - 2004-05-12 21:14:31
|
You're in the right place. This has been fixed in CVS and we're going to do another souce tarball release today. you can replace that line that defines the new operator with: #include <new> should fix your problem. - Mark Mark P Neyer wrote: > Hi, it's me again with another question. I'm working on adding TNL to > the game engine that I'm making, and when I go to complile after > adding the line '#include <tnl.h>, it tells me that the function 'void > *operator new(size_t,void*) already has a body, which has been > definted in (MSFT Visual Studio.NET)\Vc7\include\new. I looked at this > definition, as well as the definition of new in 'tnlTypes.h', and > they appeared to be the exact same thing. I commented out the > function definition in tnlTypes.h and then told it to #include<new> > right there instead, and everything compiled fine. I haven't actually > made the TNL code /do /anything yet, so I can't be sure if this ruins > functionality. Is there any reason why 'new' was defined outside of > the TNL namespace? > > As an aside question, this is my first time joining any sort of open > source development mailing list. Am I asking the 'right kind' of > questions and is this the right place to ask them ? I'd hate to be > annoying everyone on the list ... > > Mark P Neyer |