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
# mkinstalldirs --- make directory hierarchy
# Author: Noah Friedman <friedman@prep.ai.mit.edu>
# Created: 1993-05-16
# Public domain

# $Id$

errstatus=0

for file
do
   set fnord `echo ":$file" | sed -ne 's/^:\//#/;s/^://;s/\// /g;s/^#/\//;p'`
   shift

   pathcomp=
   for d
   do
     pathcomp="$pathcomp$d"
     case "$pathcomp" in
       -* ) pathcomp=./$pathcomp ;;
     esac

     if test ! -d "$pathcomp"; then
        echo "mkdir $pathcomp"

        mkdir "$pathcomp" || lasterr=$?

        if test ! -d "$pathcomp"; then
  	  errstatus=$lasterr
        fi
     fi

     pathcomp="$pathcomp/"
   done
done

exit $errstatus

# mkinstalldirs ends here