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?

The reason these libraries are built outside of the standard XFree86
tree is so that they can be linked as shared object code directly into
SDL without causing any symbol collisions with code in the application.

You can't link static library code into shared libraries on non-x86
Linux platforms.  Since these libraries haven't become standard yet,
we'll just include them directly.

These sources are synchronized with XFree86 4.2.1