[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX
From: |
Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf |
Subject: |
Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 15:26:01 +0100 |
>
>Well, that's something I don't understand. In my understanding #import
>statements should be better by far, because they take the burden of
>"safeguarding" your headers from you and they're also faster, as they
>prevent headers from being opened more than once - something which the
>#include thing cannot do. So why is it you consider #include superior
>over #import statements (asking out of curiosity)?
>
Here is a stan shebs statement on this topic:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%23import+%23include+author:stan+author:shebs&hl=de&scoring=d&selm=3C23D198.258225C5%40apple.com&rnum=1
>
>Cheers,
>
> Marcus
- Re: import vs include Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, (continued)
- Re: import vs include Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2002/02/27
- Re: import vs include Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Dirk Theisen, 2002/02/27
- Re: import vs include Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Nicola Pero, 2002/02/27
- Re: import vs include Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Dirk Theisen, 2002/02/27
- Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Adam Fedor, 2002/02/26
- Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Marcus Müller, 2002/02/26
- Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Pascal Bourguignon, 2002/02/26
- Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Helge Hess, 2002/02/26
Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2002/02/26
Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX,
Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <=
Re: Porting autogsdoc to OSX, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2002/02/26