It is saying there is not such member 'GetObjectW' for ObjectGroup when CLEARLY the only method being called is 'GetObject'
What.
0
Visual Studio 2008: 'W' is for WTF?
Started by KanonBaum, Oct 16 2011 08:30 PM
8 replies to this topic
Ad:
#4 Members - Reputation: 1870
Posted 16 October 2011 - 09:47 PM
You're definitely including a Windows header somewhere in this source file. Otherwise, you wouldn't get an error message since the Tmx::Object::GetObject would also be changed to Tmx::Object::GetObjectW. Therefore the Tmx::Object header is not including a Windows header and map.cpp (or one of its dependencies) is. See if /showIncludes shows anything suspicious.
Also, here's a quickfix:
Also, here's a quickfix:
#undef GetObject // OMG TEH WIN32 D:<
#5 Members - Reputation: 277
Posted 16 October 2011 - 10:39 PM
Did some research. Turns out the library I was using includes windows and it DOES in fact have a method named GetObject.
Using the quickfix before usage made it work. Thanks a bunch.
But WHY does Win32 DO that?? That's so messed up!
Using the quickfix before usage made it work. Thanks a bunch.
But WHY does Win32 DO that?? That's so messed up!
I'm that imaginary number in the parabola of life.
#7 Members - Reputation: 3692
Posted 16 October 2011 - 11:42 PM
Did some research. Turns out the library I was using includes windows and it DOES in fact have a method named GetObject.
Using the quickfix before usage made it work. Thanks a bunch.
But WHY does Win32 DO that?? That's so messed up!
If you enable unicode support in your build windows.h automatically replaces a certain set of functions with their unicode equivalents and since its done using preprocessor macros they are effectivly just dumb text replacements (Which is one of the reasons why C++ macros are such an awful idea)
This problem exists for pretty much all functions in the Windows API.
I don't suffer from insanity, I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!
The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!
#8 Members - Reputation: 1098
Posted 18 October 2011 - 10:20 AM
at the time, the dominant language was C, not C++, so function overloading wasn't an option. They could have just made everyone call the W version directly, but then people would have whined about how dumb all the API names were (like you sometimes see for the unicode C-runtime functions, e.g. wcslen). Plus Microsoft was already fighting an uphill battle to get people to accept that Unicode was a good thing rather than a waste of memory (ASCII should be good enough for anybody!) And even the people who were willing to accept Unicode didn't want to have to go through their entire program changing function names - porting to NT (from Win16) was enough work already. Plus if they did that then it wouldn't compile for 16-bit anymore and that was where the real market was.They didn't consider the consequences of their decision hard enough at the time.
The macros were a perfectly reasonable compromise at the time. It is unfortunate that they don't provide a way to use overloading instead of macros for C++ nowadays, but I imagine there's little real benefit and it would very likely increase compile times in addition to making the headers simply bigger.
-Mike
#9 Members - Reputation: 302
Posted 19 October 2011 - 05:42 AM
Learned new things today. Great reply, Anon Mike. +Like 
Fable Fox is Stronger <--- Fable Fox is Stronger Project
