Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Duplicate Definitions #127

Open
astrelsky opened this issue Jun 15, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Duplicate Definitions #127

astrelsky opened this issue Jun 15, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@astrelsky
Copy link
Contributor

// For generic enabling or disabling
#define GS_DISABLE 0x00
#define GS_ENABLE 0x01

#define GS_DISABLE 0
#define GS_ENABLE 1

While their values are the same it still produces a warning.

@rickgaiser
Copy link
Member

There's a lot more duplicate things in those two header files. They look like 2 different GS libraries. For instance:

#define GS_REG_TEX1_1 0x14

#define gs_g_tex1_1 0x14

The GS_DISABLE/GS_ENABLE is probably the only conflict though. We could add #ifndef GS_DISABLE... etc... around these 2 definitions in both files I guess. But why would code use both libraries at the same time?

@astrelsky
Copy link
Contributor Author

There's a lot more duplicate things in those two header files. They look like 2 different GS libraries. For instance:

#define GS_REG_TEX1_1 0x14

#define gs_g_tex1_1 0x14

The GS_DISABLE/GS_ENABLE is probably the only conflict though. We could add #ifndef GS_DISABLE... etc... around these 2 definitions in both files I guess. But why would code use both libraries at the same time?

I honestly don't know why. However, if they are intended to be separate libraries, shouldn't they be guarded to prevent them from being used at the same time?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants