kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[John Beard <john.j.beard@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Wayne,

On 29 March 2019 22:30:27 GMT, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I don't know if I want to force this even though I think it's a good
> idea.  So few of the source files in KiCad adhere to this that it would
> confuse new developers.  However, devs should be aware of the issue.

Sure, it's more of an note than a requirement: "any header that comes
first must implicitly satisfy all its dependencies (in the context of
that compilation unit)". It wasn't intended as a policy requirement.
Indeed, as it's possible to include headers with different
combinations of include paths and defines depending on where you make
the include, it is no guarantee that the header is unbreakable in all
places.

I agree we should not make requirements that do not match the majority
practice in KiCad.

Cheers,

John