Re: [Quickfix-developers] linux compilation

[Igor S. <se...@ma...>]

Hi,

Correct :)
This code snapshot was taken from one of many pages found via google, I 
didn't notice that it is erroneous because I was focused on the actual 
problem.
The idea is that gcc 4.1 doesn't ignore extra qualification anymore. And 
quickfix does have such. I mention it once again, please ignore all this if 
it has been fixed in CVS already.

quickfix/src/C++/LIBXML_DOMDocument.h:
...
  class LIBXML_DOMAttributes : public DOMAttributes
  {
    bool get( const std::string&, std::string& );
    DOMAttributes::map LIBXML_DOMAttributes::toMap();
  };
...

The "LIBXML_DOMAttributes::" in front of toMap() is not necessary and 
becomes an error with gcc 4.1.

Kind regards,
Igor

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Caleb Epstein" <cal...@gm...>
To: "Igor Seleznev" <se...@ma...>
Cc: "Alexey Zubko" <ale...@gm...>; 
<qui...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Quickfix-developers] linux compilation


On 5/24/06, Igor Seleznev <se...@ma...> wrote:
> For quickfix developers: the problem is that instead of
>
> class Foo
> {
>  int Foo::Foo(void);
> }
>
> it is better to write: class Foo
> {
>   int Foo(void);
> }

Its not that the latter is better.  The former is just plain wrong.
The code only compiled because the compiler (e.g. older versions of
gcc) wasn't strict enough.

A constructor can't return a value anyway, so both forms are wrong :)

-- 
Caleb Epstein
caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com