[odb-users] Compilation errors

[Tiago Macarios]

Cool! Thanks Boris =)

On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Boris Kolpackov <boris at codesynthesis.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tiago,
>
> Tiago Macarios <tiagomacarios at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > FYI: I applied your patch, but I think you forgot a semi-colon
> >
> > pthread_detach (id_);
>
> Right, I thought I've tested it but turns out it was C++11 threads
> configuration.
>
>
> > I am integrating ODB to our build system, so I will be reporting a couple
> > more things. Hope you don't mind.
>
> Sure, we always appreciate bug reports.
>
>
> > 1 - When compiling libodb on Visual Studio I am getting:
> >
> > condition.obj : warning LNK4221: This object file does not define any
> > previously undefined public symbols, so it will not be used by any link
> > operation that consumes this library
> >
> > I had a look at condition.cxx and it seems like it is empty on purpose,
> but
> > I don't really understand why (even though there is some text trying to
> > explain, sorry about that).
>
> This is the Windows DLL symbol exporting "brain-death". Currently the ODB
> approach is to export inline functions which sometimes requires having a
> dummy source file so that they are actually "seen" and exported by the
> compiler.
>
> In build2 builds we have switched to not exporting inline functions by
> default. We are probably not going to back-port it to the VC projects
> since there is no guarantee all the old version of VC will be happy.
>
> But this warning is harmless and you can ignore it.
>
>
> > 2 - In the mapping example examples/mapping/traits-sqlite.hxx, shouldn't
> >
> > #include "person.hxx" // date
> >
> > be between a "pre" and "post"?
> >
> > #include <odb/pre.hxx>
> > #include "person.hxx" // date
> > #include <odb/post.hxx>
> >
> > The above fixes a couple of unknown pragma issues.
>
> We try to keep examples as pure as possible so that the code can be used
> directly in user applications. In build2 we will suppress them with cl
> option from buildfile.
>
>
> > 3 - More of a question, but on the examples and tests why do you include
> > the files on this order:
> >
> > #include "person.hxx"
> > #include "person-odb.hxx"
> >
> > I guess you wouldn't even need the "person.hxx" since "person-odb.hxx"
> > includes "person.hxx", but in case you keep both, why not flip the order:
> >
> > #include "person-odb.hxx"
> > #include "person.hxx"
>
> Flipping the order is a matter of style. We try to include more general
> headers first. As for why include both, again, our style is to explicitly
> include everything we use.
>
>
> > 4 - When using GCC I get a fair bit of warnings on the examples about the
> > use of auto_ptr,
>
> Yes, this can only get fixed once we drop C++98 support, which we plan to
> do as soon as we release the next version.
>
> Boris
>