Reducing the header maze (warning: long, unsuitable for children)

[Francois Gouget]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Greg Turner wrote:
[...]
> Anyhow, this project has served to remind me just how deep, and how
> confusing, the maze of wine headers can really be.  It's clear to me
> that lots of header inclusions are just historical remnants, that no
> longer serve any purpose, and, conversely, that many implicit header
> dependencies exist that happen to be hidden, and missing (i.e., X.h
> needs Y.h, but all references to X.h happen to occur after Y.h was
> already included, so there's no compile failure).  A third kind of
> unnecessary (but arguably correct, in many cases) dependency is created
> when an include file is pulled in that is already pulled in by some
> prior include...

Many Windows programs expect that they will get the definitions of y.h
when then include x.h because x.h happens to include y.h anyway. So
preserving such includes is important if you do not want to break
Winelib. So as long as your automatic scripts preserve such dependencies
I'm ok with it.

IOW, it's probably not feasible.


-- 
Francois Gouget         fgouget at free.fr        http://fgouget.free.fr/
      Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
                            -- from some indian guy