I'm in VS2013, C++ console applications. I'm having a problem integrating boost into a large framework. If I try integrating them in a blank console application, they work fine. Once I include the "root" .h file of the framework (that includes "many" other .h files in the bargain), it breaks. These .h files are "polluting" the boost ones (and anything included after, with mixed results, and no, I can't just include boost ones first, that's not always an option unfortunately). I've found at least one root-level #define that interfered and caused a compile error, but I can't find some of the other conflicts that are causing run-time problems.
Specifically, my problem is this: how do I tell what symbols have been defined by .h files? And hopefully, which ones are then conflicting later? I tried googling, but couldn't find a tool for doing this.
Or is there some other method which can "isolate" them (my problem .h files), and yet still have them link correctly to the functions they're calling in other .dlls?
You can use g++ -E as a static code checking tool (without changing your toolset). It is able to tell you when something is redefined but not when a #define is used as another name (it would have no way to tell whether it was a real substitution or not).
If that's not the source of your problem then you may need to take a more holistic approach: Start changing your project's #define use to other constructs such as const and short functions. This will then allow the compiler to either resolve differences by overloading or complain that there are conflicts.
Including same header file again might have caused the problem,you can create a symbol for each header file so that if that header file is already included in some other header file it shouldn't be included.
#ifndef
#define __header_file_name_H
.....some code
#endif
Related
This question is about something that after more than a year with C++ I can't solve or find any solution about it.
I got used to using separate files for headers and code in C, but I have a problem with it on C++: whenever I edit a header file and try to compile the code that uses it again, the compiler doesn't notice the change on the header.
What I do to solve this is "compiling" the header (.hpp) alone. Sometimes I just add it to the list of source files for g++ along with the rest of the code, but what happens then is that I have to execute the command twice (the first time it gives me errors, but not the second time). It also warns me that I'm using the "pragma once" option in a main file.
I know this is very wrong, so I've searched for a correct way to do this, without success. I have noticed that g++ generates ".gch" files but I don't really know what's their purpose, although they may be related.
I suspect that the problem is caused because of the code in the ".hpp". I know (I think) that the good way to do it is to define prototypes only inside the header and writing the body of the methods in a separate file, but sometimes (specially when using templates) this generates even more problems.
The .gch is a precompiled header and it is created if you explicitly compile a header file.
The compiler will then use that file instead of the actual header (the compiler does not care about modification timestamps).
Do rm *.gch and leave all headers out of the compilation command forever.
(And don't put template implementations in .cpp files.)
I always have problems with c++ on this, I spend more time trying to solve dependencies instead of programming when I setup a new project. I search the internet a way to do this automatic, or softwares that do that. In fact, I always program on geany and compile with shell script files...
So, is there a software to manage this? Do IDE's do that?
I always include .cpp files on my main.cpp and then I include the .hpp files on these .cpp. So, if I have a main.cpp, a object.hpp and a object.cpp, I will include the object.cpp in the main.cpp and the object.hpp on the object.cpp. Is there a better way to do that?
Can I just include the .hpp files and in the build script add every .cpp file?
I just cant find the answer on the internet, maybe im doing the wrong question...
I have found a nice article dealing with including files.
Common practice for all c++ header files is to simply define inclusion guards.
#ifndef TEST_H
#define TEST_H
// class definitions goes here
#endif
If there are some cyclic dependencies, consider forward declaration.
Every-time this header is included, the compiler checks, whether symbol TEST_H has been defined already. This basically guarantees, that contents of this file are included only once, and so that there is single declaration of the classes, defined in header file.
Good to know is, that directive "#include <>" does copy and paste all the contents of the included file.
Including .cpp file is not strictly disallowed, and sometimes good choice, it is considered a bad practice. As I mentioned, including file, means that all contents of the file are being duplicated at the place of inclusion. This is okay, for the header file with inclusion guard, but not okay for .cpp file, since every function definition inside this file, will be duplicated.
Not including file in the build script means, that only the those duplicated data are included in the build, otherwise you would end up with multiple function redefinition errors.
If you are looking for IDE, consider:
Visual Studio
Code Blocks
Eclipse
IDE won't do all the work, but you can be significantly more productive using good IDE.
TLDR:
Use inclusion guards
Include all .cpp files in build script.
Do not "#include" .cpp files.
In every .cpp file, include only needed headers, to reduce compilation time.
I see a lot of good suggestions with good practices but your mistake (including .cpp files from a .cpp file) suggest you're missing some concept in the C/C++ build process, I hope a little explanation would help you understand better and avoid the mistake.
Think of .c .cc .cxx .cpp files as modules, a .cpp file is a module, with your implementation of something, .h .hpp are just headers where usually you don't put implementations but declarations to be shared with multiple modules.
Usually each .cpp module is compiled to a binary object g++ -c -o mymod1.o mymod1.cpp then (once all modules are compiled) linked together g++ -o myprog mymod1.o mymod2.o ....
Even if you compile and link with a single command g++ -o myprog mymod1.cpp mymod2.cpp behind the scene g++ handle each module as single object.
I think is important you understand that each module/object know nothing about others, and if you need some other module (your main.cpp) to know something about mymod1.cpp a header file is required .h .hpp (mymod1.h) with the declarations needed to be shared: module global variables, defines, enums, function prototypes or class declarations, then just include mymod1.h in the module(s) where you want to use something of your mymod1 implementation (main.cpp).
Also, you write you're using a shell script to build, that's ok if your project are few files, better would be to use something like make, learn how to use it will require some time but then I bet geany have some facility to build projects based on Makefiles, make is the way to handle C/C++ projects from a long time.
how to include certain header files by default so that i don't have to type them in every programs:
In dev c++ and code::blocks
Make a global header file that in turn includes whatever files you need in every project, and then you only have to include that single file.
However I would recommend against it, unless all your different project are very similar. Different projects have different needs and also need different header files.
You could issue a compiler directive in your project file or make script to do "per project" includes, but in general I would avoid that.
Source code should be as clear as possible to any reader just by its content. Whenever I have source code that dramatically changes its semantics, eg. by headers that are unknown to me, this can be quite confusing.
On top of that, if you "inject" those headers for certain compilation units that don't need them, that will negatively impact compile time.
As a substitution, what about introducing a common.h/hpp header that includes those certain header files? You can then include your common header in all files that need them and change this common set of headers for all depending files at once. It also opens the door to use precompiled header files, which may be worth a look for you.
From GCC documentation (AFAIK GCC is default compiler used by the development environment you are citing)
-include file
Process file as if #include "file" appeared as the first line of the primary source file. However, the first directory searched for
file is the preprocessor's working directory instead of the directory
containing the main source file. If not found there, it is searched
for in the remainder of the #include "..." search chain as normal.
If multiple -include options are given, the files are included in the order they appear on the command line.
-imacros file
Exactly like -include, except that any output produced by scanning file is thrown away. Macros it defines remain defined. This allows you
to acquire all the macros from a header without also processing its
declarations.
All files specified by -imacros are processed before all files specified by -include.
But it is usually a bad idea to use these.
Dev c++ works with MingW compiler, which is gcc compiler for Windows. Gcc supports precompiled headers, so you can try that. Precompiled headers are header files that you want compiled and added to every object file in a project. Try searching for that in Google for some information.
Code::blocks supports them too, when used with gcc, even better, so there it may even be easier.
If your editor of choice supports macros, make one that adds your preferred set of include files. Once made, all you have to do is invoke your macro to save yourself the repetitive typing and you're golden.
Hope this helps.
I recently had a class project where I had to make a program with G++.
I used a makefile and for some reason it occasionally left a .h.gch file behind.
Sometimes, this didn't affect the compilation, but every so often it would result in the compiler issuing an error for an issue which had been fixed or which did not make sense.
I have two questions:
1) What is a .h.gch file and what is one used for? and
2) Why would it cause such problems when it wasn't cleaned up?
A .gch file is a precompiled header.
If a .gch is not found then the normal header files will be used.
However, if your project is set to generate pre-compiled headers it will make them if they don’t exist and use them in the next build.
Sometimes the *.h.gch will get corrupted or contain outdated information, so deleting that file and compiling it again should fix it.
If you want to know about a file, simply type on terminal
file filename
file a.h.gch gives:
GCC precompiled header (version 013) for C
Its a GCC precompiled header.
Wikipedia has a half decent explanation, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precompiled_header
Other answers are completely accurate with regard to what a gch file is. However, context (in this case, a beginner using g++) is everything. In this context, there are two rules:
Never, ever, ever put a .h file on a g++ compile line. Only .cpp files. If a .h file is ever compiled accidentally, remove any *.gch files
Never, ever, ever put a .cpp file in an #include statement.
If rule one is broken, at some point the problem described in the question will occur.
If rule two is broken, at some point the linker will complain about multiply-defined symbols.
a) They're precompiled headers:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Precompiled-Headers.html
b) They contain "cached" information from .h files and should be updated every time you change respective .h file. If it doesn't happen - you have wrong dependencies set in your project
I am working on a large C++ project in Visual Studio 2008, and there are a lot of files with unnecessary #include directives. Sometimes the #includes are just artifacts and everything will compile fine with them removed, and in other cases classes could be forward declared and the #include could be moved to the .cpp file. Are there any good tools for detecting both of these cases?
While it won't reveal unneeded include files, Visual studio has a setting /showIncludes (right click on a .cpp file, Properties->C/C++->Advanced) that will output a tree of all included files at compile time. This can help in identifying files that shouldn't need to be included.
You can also take a look at the pimpl idiom to let you get away with fewer header file dependencies to make it easier to see the cruft that you can remove.
PC Lint works quite well for this, and it finds all sorts of other goofy problems for you too. It has command line options that can be used to create External Tools in Visual Studio, but I've found that the Visual Lint addin is easier to work with. Even the free version of Visual Lint helps. But give PC-Lint a shot. Configuring it so it doesn't give you too many warnings takes a bit of time, but you'll be amazed at what it turns up.
There's a new Clang-based tool, include-what-you-use, that aims to do this.
!!DISCLAIMER!! I work on a commercial static analysis tool (not PC Lint). !!DISCLAIMER!!
There are several issues with a simple non parsing approach:
1) Overload Sets:
It's possible that an overloaded function has declarations that come from different files. It might be that removing one header file results in a different overload being chosen rather than a compile error! The result will be a silent change in semantics that may be very difficult to track down afterwards.
2) Template specializations:
Similar to the overload example, if you have partial or explicit specializations for a template you want them all to be visible when the template is used. It might be that specializations for the primary template are in different header files. Removing the header with the specialization will not cause a compile error, but may result in undefined behaviour if that specialization would have been selected. (See: Visibility of template specialization of C++ function)
As pointed out by 'msalters', performing a full analysis of the code also allows for analysis of class usage. By checking how a class is used though a specific path of files, it is possible that the definition of the class (and therefore all of its dependnecies) can be removed completely or at least moved to a level closer to the main source in the include tree.
I don't know of any such tools, and I have thought about writing one in the past, but it turns out that this is a difficult problem to solve.
Say your source file includes a.h and b.h; a.h contains #define USE_FEATURE_X and b.h uses #ifdef USE_FEATURE_X. If #include "a.h" is commented out, your file may still compile, but may not do what you expect. Detecting this programatically is non-trivial.
Whatever tool does this would need to know your build environment as well. If a.h looks like:
#if defined( WINNT )
#define USE_FEATURE_X
#endif
Then USE_FEATURE_X is only defined if WINNT is defined, so the tool would need to know what directives are generated by the compiler itself as well as which ones are specified in the compile command rather than in a header file.
Like Timmermans, I'm not familiar with any tools for this. But I have known programmers who wrote a Perl (or Python) script to try commenting out each include line one at a time and then compile each file.
It appears that now Eric Raymond has a tool for this.
Google's cpplint.py has an "include what you use" rule (among many others), but as far as I can tell, no "include only what you use." Even so, it can be useful.
If you're interested in this topic in general, you might want to check out Lakos' Large Scale C++ Software Design. It's a bit dated, but goes into lots of "physical design" issues like finding the absolute minimum of headers that need to be included. I haven't really seen this sort of thing discussed anywhere else.
Give Include Manager a try. It integrates easily in Visual Studio and visualizes your include paths which helps you to find unnecessary stuff.
Internally it uses Graphviz but there are many more cool features. And although it is a commercial product it has a very low price.
You can build an include graph using C/C++ Include File Dependencies Watcher, and find unneeded includes visually.
If your header files generally start with
#ifndef __SOMEHEADER_H__
#define __SOMEHEADER_H__
// header contents
#endif
(as opposed to using #pragma once) you could change that to:
#ifndef __SOMEHEADER_H__
#define __SOMEHEADER_H__
// header contents
#else
#pragma message("Someheader.h superfluously included")
#endif
And since the compiler outputs the name of the cpp file being compiled, that would let you know at least which cpp file is causing the header to be brought in multiple times.
PC-Lint can indeed do this. One easy way to do this is to configure it to detect just unused include files and ignore all other issues. This is pretty straightforward - to enable just message 766 ("Header file not used in module"), just include the options -w0 +e766 on the command line.
The same approach can also be used with related messages such as 964 ("Header file not directly used in module") and 966 ("Indirectly included header file not used in module").
FWIW I wrote about this in more detail in a blog post last week at http://www.riverblade.co.uk/blog.php?archive=2008_09_01_archive.xml#3575027665614976318.
Adding one or both of the following #defines
will exclude often unnecessary header files and
may substantially improve
compile times especially if the code that is not using Windows API functions.
#define WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN
#define VC_EXTRALEAN
See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/166474
If you are looking to remove unnecessary #include files in order to decrease build times, your time and money might be better spent parallelizing your build process using cl.exe /MP, make -j, Xoreax IncrediBuild, distcc/icecream, etc.
Of course, if you already have a parallel build process and you're still trying to speed it up, then by all means clean up your #include directives and remove those unnecessary dependencies.
Start with each include file, and ensure that each include file only includes what is necessary to compile itself. Any include files that are then missing for the C++ files, can be added to the C++ files themselves.
For each include and source file, comment out each include file one at a time and see if it compiles.
It is also a good idea to sort the include files alphabetically, and where this is not possible, add a comment.
If you aren't already, using a precompiled header to include everything that you're not going to change (platform headers, external SDK headers, or static already completed pieces of your project) will make a huge difference in build times.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/szfdksca(VS.71).aspx
Also, although it may be too late for your project, organizing your project into sections and not lumping all local headers to one big main header is a good practice, although it takes a little extra work.
If you would work with Eclipse CDT you could try out http://includator.com to optimize your include structure. However, Includator might not know enough about VC++'s predefined includes and setting up CDT to use VC++ with correct includes is not built into CDT yet.
The latest Jetbrains IDE, CLion, automatically shows (in gray) the includes that are not used in the current file.
It is also possible to have the list of all the unused includes (and also functions, methods, etc...) from the IDE.
Some of the existing answers state that it's hard. That's indeed true, because you need a full compiler to detect the cases in which a forward declaration would be appropriate. You cant parse C++ without knowing what the symbols mean; the grammar is simply too ambiguous for that. You must know whether a certain name names a class (could be forward-declared) or a variable (can't). Also, you need to be namespace-aware.
Maybe a little late, but I once found a WebKit perl script that did just what you wanted. It'll need some adapting I believe (I'm not well versed in perl), but it should do the trick:
http://trac.webkit.org/browser/branches/old/safari-3-2-branch/WebKitTools/Scripts/find-extra-includes
(this is an old branch because trunk doesn't have the file anymore)
If there's a particular header that you think isn't needed anymore (say
string.h), you can comment out that include then put this below all the
includes:
#ifdef _STRING_H_
# error string.h is included indirectly
#endif
Of course your interface headers might use a different #define convention
to record their inclusion in CPP memory. Or no convention, in which case
this approach won't work.
Then rebuild. There are three possibilities:
It builds ok. string.h wasn't compile-critical, and the include for it
can be removed.
The #error trips. string.g was included indirectly somehow
You still don't know if string.h is required. If it is required, you
should directly #include it (see below).
You get some other compilation error. string.h was needed and isn't being
included indirectly, so the include was correct to begin with.
Note that depending on indirect inclusion when your .h or .c directly uses
another .h is almost certainly a bug: you are in effect promising that your
code will only require that header as long as some other header you're using
requires it, which probably isn't what you meant.
The caveats mentioned in other answers about headers that modify behavior
rather that declaring things which cause build failures apply here as well.