From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16015 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2013 17:54:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 16005 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jul 2013 17:54:18 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from Unknown (HELO mail-ie0-f175.google.com) (209.85.223.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:54:17 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id a11so4617019iee.6 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:54:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=B6cLq/Dowh6ekQO5U6DayV+zx6o0RLFZPNatn/4vlQs=; b=MRS6y0+rt0/kgggf5Muqy8f6gTJzMS67cvIDaA5KBbdd9ObIAKwvsoK0/JuLX8QTak UTyJT7ozCuFMye1pMSeUSO1SokS6k/goLkOuxEoPUaTD3EsAmEPCyZ3aWxLfbivopm7V XbtIoVe/4iBfOqdUCClxOUVYEDk/ALMnw52T/NSJOi7iVOjSo8yNfuXjq6DP7aWZQx59 85iEjnVtvGuWOL+eIiVrIf1z0m2vlNblDanA0PkXCWfrql9xS17KtrUOENbVDa3cf9xr aGfACNFs1+MPXqEEjYx9Hw9uTHnZwxaMPHg5L81jutKi/8GwFBjN2N1xfAs6NGuavBTT pqbQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.43.0.67 with SMTP id nl3mr5332075icb.2.1374083650020; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:54:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.62.67 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:54:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <838v153kyj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wqoqi5yf.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <838v153kyj.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: C99 From: Doug Evans To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQna6w9RzwW1tv3q5BH7rSvNy0qXnKawFL0AswfmaAhQ3W9PbXf9Xk7MN0y+kvs37RZGBGDYgADn/HfSN/a0VegQN7xv1MXNF3NXwvEr3kyfgksHuzCqIT4BP80vTPDtnQQzK7aW+2vYcPhNx9tF7EAZR2hfoGIBv/MduNgfK12zIrt2nKP1ot7DMQ8fQGzyiVnQIO6o X-SW-Source: 2013-07/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:48 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Tom Tromey >> 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 /**/.