Build failure on Windows C++/WinRT about glaze HOT 5 CLOSED

Oh, I found a similar problem on Stack Overflow, could you please fix it?
https://stackoverflow.com/a/13566433/21216472

from glaze.

Yeah it's looking like someone is bringing in the windows headers without defining NOMINMAX. This is a pretty well known issue with the windows headers.This wouldn't have been a problem if windows followed standard naming conventions for macros. I believe anywhere we bring in windows headers we define NOMINMAX so it's probably another include you are using.

Not technically any issue with glaze itself but I think the wrapping the function name like you linked to is probably a good idea since this is such a common issue. You can try defining NOMINMAX at the top off the file that's having problems compiling in the meantime.

from glaze.

Yeah it's looking like someone is bringing in the windows headers without defining NOMINMAX. This is a pretty well known issue with the windows headers.This wouldn't have been a problem if windows followed standard naming conventions for macros. I believe anywhere we bring in windows headers we define NOMINMAX so it's probably another include you are using.

Not technically any issue with glaze itself but I think the wrapping the function name like you linked to is probably a good idea since this is such a common issue. You can try defining NOMINMAX at the top off the file that's having problems compiling in the meantime.

I don't know if defining NOMINMAX will have a chain reaction in Windows programming, I tried fork and modified it in the form of this (std::numeric_limits<int>::max)()
and changed the names of these two functions

Here is the part I forked and modified
axojhf@3836b2c
I was wondering if you had a chance to review my code changes and if you think they could be incorporated into the project.

from glaze.

Here is the part I forked and modified axojhf@3836b2c I was wondering if you had a chance to review my code changes and if you think they could be incorporated into the project.

@axojhf, the changes look good to me. If you make a pull request I'll merge it in.

from glaze.

@axojhf I ended up merging your changes in #172. Thank you.

from glaze.