Re: [ROOT] #pragma link C++ enum and trailing +

From: Fons Rademakers (Fons.Rademakers@cern.ch)
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 22:30:25 MEST

Next message: Micha D. Niskin: "[ROOT] Is it possible to use TAttFill->SetFillAttributes() with undrawn object?"
Previous message: Artur Szostak: "[ROOT] #pragma link C++ enum and trailing +"
In reply to: Artur Szostak: "[ROOT] #pragma link C++ enum and trailing +"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

The trailing + has only meaning for classes (and structs).

-- Fons


On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 22:13, Artur Szostak wrote:
> Will it make a difference if I put trailing + signs after
> #pragma link C++ enum ENUMNAME 
> for example if I do
> #pragma link C++ enum ENUMNAME+;
> 
> rootcint seems to be happy either way.
> I know that for classes this will make rootcint emit I/O code that is 
> compatible with the newest version of root. But does it do anything for other 
> things like enum, struct etc...
-- 
Org:    CERN, European Laboratory for Particle Physics.
Mail:   1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland
E-Mail: Fons.Rademakers@cern.ch              Phone: +41 22 7679248
WWW:    http://root.cern.ch/~rdm/            Fax:   +41 22 7679480

Next message: Micha D. Niskin: "[ROOT] Is it possible to use TAttFill->SetFillAttributes() with undrawn object?"
Previous message: Artur Szostak: "[ROOT] #pragma link C++ enum and trailing +"
In reply to: Artur Szostak: "[ROOT] #pragma link C++ enum and trailing +"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 17:50:12 MET