Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 03:15:01 +0100 From: David Symmonds Subject: SDL Typedef Structs Hi, Thanks for the SDL libraries, I have been using them for about a year now and they are really brilliant. One thing that I have just found whilst using them through C++ (and needing forward declarations) is that when you typedef structs you sometimes use typedef struct Name { ... }Name; e.g. SDL_Surface and other times use typedef struct { ... }Name; e.g. SDL_Rect The first type works fine, when I define a header file I can just put 'struct Name;' at the top and use the Name throughout. However, the second type is harder to use in a header, and I haven't found a way yet, other than to include 'SDL.h' in the header file (undesirable). Would there be any harm in changing the definition of SDL_Rect and such like to the second form?

#!/bin/sh
#
echo "Generating build information using aclocal, automake and autoconf"
echo "This may take a while ..."

# Touch the timestamps on all the files since CVS messes them up
directory=`dirname $0`
touch $directory/configure.in

# Regenerate configuration files
aclocal
automake --foreign --include-deps --add-missing --copy
autoconf
(cd test; aclocal; automake --foreign --include-deps --add-missing --copy; autoconf)

# Run configure for this platform
#./configure $*
echo "Now you are ready to run ./configure"