On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Bill Kelly <billk / cts.com> wrote:
>
> From: "Johan Holmberg" <johan556 / gmail.com>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu / ruby-lang.org>
>> wrote:
[...]
>> Is there any chance that it could be backported to 1.8?
>> I would like to stay with 1.8 until 1.9 is *the* Ruby used by "everybody".
>>
>> Your answer in another mail in this thread seem to imply that it is a
>> rather easy fix (#ifdef RUBY_EXPORT). Or is it more complicated?
>
> Note, it's quite possible to use 1.8 with C++, even if it's
> not officially supported.
>
> We have been embedding ruby 1.8.4 into a C++ app for quite
> a while.  The app builds on both Windows and OS X.
>

I also have a C++ application running on OS X, Linux and Windows. In
the Windows-version I have tried to tackle the problems on a
case-by-case basis until now. Currently I have code like below in some
of my files:

--------------------------------
#include <ruby.h>
#include <st.h>

#ifdef _WIN32
// remove stupid ruby defintion
#undef write
#undef read
#endif
--------------------------------

We seem to have encountered similar problems, for example: where to
place "ruby.h", how to get VALUE defined. Until now I have tried to
avoid having the Ruby-problems affect how I organize my header files.
But perhaps the best way to cope with 1.8 is to place "ruby.h" as
locally as possible as you (and Matz earlier) suggested.

>
> Hope this helps,
> Bill
>

Yes, it is interesting to hear how others handle these kinds of problems.

Thanks,
/Johan Holmberg