Version 2.5 is “headers-only” with regard to the procedurally generated files. I may work on a guide today to touch on the finer points. Headers-only is increasingly how C++ packages are implemented/distributed, owing a lot to the modern embrace of templates. When I first started working on it, I made the generator put all of the metadata registration routines in a single CPP file, since that dramatically improved compile times. Now those are functionally inline defined, but the COLLADA_(inline) macro can be manipulated if you need to have them defined in a single translation unit. It must be manually defined. I will have to explain that in a forthcoming guide.
EDITED: BTW. If you think about it, the library can only be headers-only, because it can be used with any schema. It could output translation-units, but the setup of a translation-unit is much more fussy than simply using #include, so that’s undesirable.
I didn’t check bottom of header, declaring class then define funcs… something like C++ glm repo (g-tunc) I mean sources could be located in separate headers like detail/*.inl files, would be more clear for header only lib. Another word to say is that this will affect the build time for every build (parsing (this part may be cached by compiler or ccache), building, linking everytime)? Of course probably compiler may do more optimizations for header only sources… this will also may take a little extra time
I imported headers to Xcode to test but there is an another issue ColladaDOM.inl this header is missing in headers folder referenced in http_www_collada_org_2005_11_COLLADASchema.h
P.S. A few days ago the webmaster here asked me to help moderator the forum(s), because of the spam that is regularly appearing. They also mentioned that they are working on converting the forums over to Discourse (not to be confused with Diqus) which I’d never heard of.
I hope this will not make forum more complicated and ugly
EDITED: I only noticed the letter today. Partly because my ISP’s webmail service has been so inundated with spam the last week that I am trying to make a point to find a new email address for myself. Either on my private server, or even I asked if I could get a Khronos mail address. ISPs just don’t take spam seriously and apparently don’t have access to non-commercial spam filters, or are too incompetent. I really wish we could find a technical answer to spam. Even if it involves micro-taxation or something like that. It’s coming to a head I think. It’s such a productivity drain on everybody.
Zoho mail is free (and not bad) and ACM/SIGGRAPH give you an email (forwarding only) with spam filtering if you have account e.g. firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com