Re: C99

[Doug Evans <dje@google.com>]

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:48 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
>> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 14:51:36 -0600
>>
>> So, I'd like to propose we allow the use of C99 in gdb.  In particular I
>> think we ought to require a C99 preprocessor -- enabling this particular
>> patch to go in and also allowing the use of "//" comments.
>
> I can understand the C99 requirement (although many GNU projects still
> don't) where it allows better programming practices.  But the //
> comment style doesn't make anything easier or more efficient, it's
> just different.

Well, yes and no.

It can be what some contributors are used to.  Saying // is not
allowed is another quirky imposition one has to remember.  To me, it
doesn't get in the way of reading code the way other differences can
(indentation, SymbolSpellingStyle, etc.).  Note that we're already
using // in code:  While it's in /* ... */ comments in, e.g. queue.h
and gnulib's string.h, for obvious simplicity reasons the code in the
comments isn't less readable.  Plus if we import code from elsewhere
we don't want to be in the business of changing // to /**/.