undeclared identifier "class"
-
hey guys, I'm having a problem with a project I'm working on. When I compile my project, I get a "undeclared identifier "class" error.
***no includes(not part of code)*** class TME_BasicParameters { public: * values taken from the basic programming screen */ float torqueHighLim; float turnOffStage2; float torqueLowLim; float startAngle; float turnOffStage1; float trigger; float stage1Speed; float angleLowLim; float turnOffAngle; float angleHighLim; float stage2Speed; float backoff; int strategy; int app; int tool; };:confused: any ideas? -
hey guys, I'm having a problem with a project I'm working on. When I compile my project, I get a "undeclared identifier "class" error.
***no includes(not part of code)*** class TME_BasicParameters { public: * values taken from the basic programming screen */ float torqueHighLim; float turnOffStage2; float torqueLowLim; float startAngle; float turnOffStage1; float trigger; float stage1Speed; float angleLowLim; float turnOffAngle; float angleHighLim; float stage2Speed; float backoff; int strategy; int app; int tool; };:confused: any ideas?VonHagNDaz wrote:
When I compile my project, I get a "undeclared identifier "class" error.
What line of what file is the compiler complaining about?
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
When I compile my project, I get a "undeclared identifier "class" error.
What line of what file is the compiler complaining about?
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
Its complaining about the line where I say "class TME_BasicParameters.h" "D:\SvnWork\S168813\Source\TME_Screen_Port\TME_BasicParameters.h", line 2: error: identifier "class" is undefined class TME_BasicParameters ^ "D:\SvnWork\S168813\Source\TME_Screen_Port\TME_BasicParameters.h", line 3: error: expected a ";" { ^ "D:\SvnWork\S168813\Source\TME_Screen_Port\TME_BasicParameters.h", line 174: warning: parsing restarts here after previous syntax error }; Also, I only get the error when I try to include "TME_BasicParameters.h." "TME_BasicParameters" is included in my project. Both files are located in the same directory. Here is the syntax I use in the other file:
/* TME_DEFS.h contains all global definitions for the common controller */ #include "TME_BasicParameters.h" /* the number of supported tools */ #define MAXTOOLS 2 /* the number of supported applications */ #define MAXAPPS 255 /* the number of supported stages for a given application */ #define MAXSTAGES 7 /* the number of supported tightening groups */ #define MAXTIGHTGRPS 8Pretty basic, but maybe that snipet will help shine some light.[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
hey guys, I'm having a problem with a project I'm working on. When I compile my project, I get a "undeclared identifier "class" error.
***no includes(not part of code)*** class TME_BasicParameters { public: * values taken from the basic programming screen */ float torqueHighLim; float turnOffStage2; float torqueLowLim; float startAngle; float turnOffStage1; float trigger; float stage1Speed; float angleLowLim; float turnOffAngle; float angleHighLim; float stage2Speed; float backoff; int strategy; int app; int tool; };:confused: any ideas?This error is typically caused by a missing semi-colon in a class definition. Check the files in included in this source file and see if you missed any semi-color for a class or struct definition. -Saurabh
-
Its complaining about the line where I say "class TME_BasicParameters.h" "D:\SvnWork\S168813\Source\TME_Screen_Port\TME_BasicParameters.h", line 2: error: identifier "class" is undefined class TME_BasicParameters ^ "D:\SvnWork\S168813\Source\TME_Screen_Port\TME_BasicParameters.h", line 3: error: expected a ";" { ^ "D:\SvnWork\S168813\Source\TME_Screen_Port\TME_BasicParameters.h", line 174: warning: parsing restarts here after previous syntax error }; Also, I only get the error when I try to include "TME_BasicParameters.h." "TME_BasicParameters" is included in my project. Both files are located in the same directory. Here is the syntax I use in the other file:
/* TME_DEFS.h contains all global definitions for the common controller */ #include "TME_BasicParameters.h" /* the number of supported tools */ #define MAXTOOLS 2 /* the number of supported applications */ #define MAXAPPS 255 /* the number of supported stages for a given application */ #define MAXSTAGES 7 /* the number of supported tightening groups */ #define MAXTIGHTGRPS 8Pretty basic, but maybe that snipet will help shine some light.[Insert Witty Sig Here]
VonHagNDaz wrote:
Its complaining about the line where I say "class TME_BasicParameters.h"
Why the
.hat the end of the class name?"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
Its complaining about the line where I say "class TME_BasicParameters.h"
Why the
.hat the end of the class name?"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
typo :doh: full code: TME_BasicParameters.h
class BasicParameters { /* values taken from the basic programming screen */ float torqueHighLim; float turnOffStage2; float torqueLowLim; float startAngle; float turnOffStage1; float trigger; float stage1Speed; float angleLowLim; float turnOffAngle; float angleHighLim; float stage2Speed; float backoff; int strategy; int app; int tool; };TME_DEFS.h/* TME_DEFS.h contains all global definitions for the common controller */ /* the number of supported tools */ #define MAXTOOLS 2 /* the number of supported applications */ #define MAXAPPS 255 /* the number of supported stages for a given application */ #define MAXSTAGES 7 /* the number of supported tightening groups */ #define MAXTIGHTGRPS 8 #include "TME_BasicParameters.h"[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
typo :doh: full code: TME_BasicParameters.h
class BasicParameters { /* values taken from the basic programming screen */ float torqueHighLim; float turnOffStage2; float torqueLowLim; float startAngle; float turnOffStage1; float trigger; float stage1Speed; float angleLowLim; float turnOffAngle; float angleHighLim; float stage2Speed; float backoff; int strategy; int app; int tool; };TME_DEFS.h/* TME_DEFS.h contains all global definitions for the common controller */ /* the number of supported tools */ #define MAXTOOLS 2 /* the number of supported applications */ #define MAXAPPS 255 /* the number of supported stages for a given application */ #define MAXSTAGES 7 /* the number of supported tightening groups */ #define MAXTIGHTGRPS 8 #include "TME_BasicParameters.h"[Insert Witty Sig Here]
I don't see anything wrong with line #2 of the
TME_BasicParameters.hfile. Are you using.cor.cppfiles?"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
I don't see anything wrong with line #2 of the
TME_BasicParameters.hfile. Are you using.cor.cppfiles?"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
The majority of the project files are .c, written a long, long time ago. I've been assigned to maintain and add a few new features. My goal was to make the newer features more object oriented as opposed to millions of structs that the old code was using. I could always give up and continue adding to the endless amount of structs, but I wanted to begin adding more object oriented techniques and get away from some of the older c stuff.
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
The majority of the project files are .c, written a long, long time ago. I've been assigned to maintain and add a few new features. My goal was to make the newer features more object oriented as opposed to millions of structs that the old code was using. I could always give up and continue adding to the endless amount of structs, but I wanted to begin adding more object oriented techniques and get away from some of the older c stuff.
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
VonHagNDaz wrote:
The majority of the project files are .c,
Which may be why the compiler is complaining about the
classkeyword."Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
VonHagNDaz wrote:
The majority of the project files are .c,
Which may be why the compiler is complaining about the
classkeyword."Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
Aren't most compilers smart enough to cross compile c and c++ files in the same project, or am I confused?
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
Aren't most compilers smart enough to cross compile c and c++ files in the same project, or am I confused?
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
There's nothing wrong with having .c and .cpp files in the same project.
"Love people and use things, not love things and use people." - Unknown
"To have a respect for ourselves guides our morals; to have deference for others governs our manners." - Laurence Sterne
-
Aren't most compilers smart enough to cross compile c and c++ files in the same project, or am I confused?
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
I suppose they're smart enough to consider
*.cfiles asCsources, while*.cppones asC++sources. :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke -
I suppose they're smart enough to consider
*.cfiles asCsources, while*.cppones asC++sources. :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain ClarkeCPallini wrote:
I suppose they're smart enough to consider *.c files as C sources, while *.cpp ones as C++ sources.
correct, but what I'm trying to do is make a class in a .cpp file. Long story short I gave up and I'm using structs now, but structs cant have member functions, so I'm confused. I've only been exposed to OOP in c++, and I've poked c with a 10 foot pole once. I need member functions for the struct, or is that strictly c++ OOP? Google isn't turning up much when I search for member functions for structs, I'm guessing this is a lost cause as well. dumb programming question #2 : If I was trying to make a more object oriented approach in c, where would I begin? That might be a basic question, but if you've been reading, all my attempts so far have failed, or are wrong... moral : Colleges need more classes on just c and non OOP approaches. In school we had 10+ c++ OOP classes, and one c class where they said "This is c, no one uses it anymore, but now you've been exposed to it..."
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
CPallini wrote:
I suppose they're smart enough to consider *.c files as C sources, while *.cpp ones as C++ sources.
correct, but what I'm trying to do is make a class in a .cpp file. Long story short I gave up and I'm using structs now, but structs cant have member functions, so I'm confused. I've only been exposed to OOP in c++, and I've poked c with a 10 foot pole once. I need member functions for the struct, or is that strictly c++ OOP? Google isn't turning up much when I search for member functions for structs, I'm guessing this is a lost cause as well. dumb programming question #2 : If I was trying to make a more object oriented approach in c, where would I begin? That might be a basic question, but if you've been reading, all my attempts so far have failed, or are wrong... moral : Colleges need more classes on just c and non OOP approaches. In school we had 10+ c++ OOP classes, and one c class where they said "This is c, no one uses it anymore, but now you've been exposed to it..."
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
Only
C++structs allow member functions (C++ structs are just classes with different default visibility rules). Maybe I missed a point: if you needOOP, while are you usingClanguage?VonHagNDaz wrote:
If I was trying to make a more object oriented approach in c,
Use
C++.Clanguage is best suited for structured programming. There's nothing wrong in following structured programming paradigm: for small projects it is a winning approach. On the other hand, if you need to exploitOOPadvantages, you should use an object oriented language, suchC++. :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke -
Only
C++structs allow member functions (C++ structs are just classes with different default visibility rules). Maybe I missed a point: if you needOOP, while are you usingClanguage?VonHagNDaz wrote:
If I was trying to make a more object oriented approach in c,
Use
C++.Clanguage is best suited for structured programming. There's nothing wrong in following structured programming paradigm: for small projects it is a winning approach. On the other hand, if you need to exploitOOPadvantages, you should use an object oriented language, suchC++. :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain ClarkeCPallini wrote:
while are you using C language?
all of the source is in c. This is a massive amount of code I'm maintaining and adding new features to. I thought that I could use .cpp classes, include the .h files in the .c files, and access the object's member functions through pointers. The approach made sense to me, but I guess I'm stuck with c structs and no member functions.
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
CPallini wrote:
while are you using C language?
all of the source is in c. This is a massive amount of code I'm maintaining and adding new features to. I thought that I could use .cpp classes, include the .h files in the .c files, and access the object's member functions through pointers. The approach made sense to me, but I guess I'm stuck with c structs and no member functions.
[Insert Witty Sig Here]
Why don't you upgrade to
C++(i.e. rename from.cto.cpp) the files wherein you want to use classes? :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke -
Why don't you upgrade to
C++(i.e. rename from.cto.cpp) the files wherein you want to use classes? :)If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke:doh: Why are the simplest answers the hardest to find? [Insert Witty Sig Here]
-
:doh: Why are the simplest answers the hardest to find? [Insert Witty Sig Here]
Often posting the right question is difficult. :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
