Wingulls can have them as hold items in the wild if I ' m wrong go to serebii . net <| sep |> Another little thing , since I was on the subjectThere ' s the reason why you want to include headers in headers , and be a little bit sure that you have everything , because if you change something in b . h , which a . h depended on getting something from you can have issues . When you could have just included it in a . hThat said , the other problem comes up , when you have a maze like dependency and you change something in X . h you can wind up affecting many more files than you intendedIn tree like , or line like dependency it ' s fine , change something in blah 3 . h then blah 2 . h and blah 1 . h will be affected , but if you don ' t have this you can wind up causing issues in places you didn ' t even intend to . Sometimes it might just cause an compiler issue , like if you change a name in foo . h and it winds up the same as a name in bar . h and you get a multiple definition error . But here ' s whats scarier to meWhat happens if you have a struct definition in foo . h that is included in a few other files which themselves have structs that are included in other files . On the low end of the bad scale you get a bunch of errors due to things not lining upOn the scary end of the bad scale the functionality of your program silently changes and you don ' t find out , until one day that part of your program you thought was going to work how it did before doesn ' t .