On 16 February 2015 at 17:45, Jonny Grant wrote:
> While I remember:
> Stroustrup lists C++ extensions as .cxx and .cpp
> http://www.stroustrup.com/glossary.html
>
> ISO sample sources use .cpp:
> http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/c043351_ISO_IEC_TR_18015_2006(E).zip
>
> .C i
On 2 February 2015 at 23:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 2 February 2015 at 21:11, Jonny Grant wrote:
>> Is this a consensus agreement to rename those .C -> .cc ?
>
> No.
While I remember:
Stroustrup lists C++ extensions as .cxx and .cpp
http://www.stroustrup.com/glossary.html
ISO sample sources
On Sat, 2015-02-07 at 23:17 +, Jonny Grant wrote:
> On 03/02/15 23:20, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Jonny Grant writes:
> >
> >> How many minutes labor is this task?
> >
> > What does it fix?
>
> Consistency. Less important if these files are only compiled after GCC
> available, to use as a tes
On 03/02/15 23:20, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jonny Grant writes:
How many minutes labor is this task?
What does it fix?
Consistency. Less important if these files are only compiled after GCC
available, to use as a testsuite. Although I understood from other
replies that other files needed h
On 4 February 2015 at 00:22, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
> How many hacks/workarounds can be avoided?
How many new hacks/workaround will be needed for exploring the files'
version control history, even with a VCS that supports renaming?
Renaming the files has downsides as well as upsi
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix)
wrote:
>
>> Am 04.02.2015 um 00:20 schrieb Andreas Schwab :
>>
>> Jonny Grant writes:
>>
>>> How many minutes labor is this task?
>>
>> What does it fix?
>
> How many hacks/workarounds can be avoided?
None.
> Am 04.02.2015 um 00:20 schrieb Andreas Schwab :
>
> Jonny Grant writes:
>
>> How many minutes labor is this task?
>
> What does it fix?
How many hacks/workarounds can be avoided?
On Tue, 3 Feb 2015, Jonny Grant wrote:
> > There are around 11k files that have the .C ending to them; all in the
> > testsuite. I don't think it make sense to move them.
>
> How many minutes labor is this task?
It's desirable for test names to be stable so that results can be compared
over ti
Jonny Grant writes:
> How many minutes labor is this task?
What does it fix?
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
On 02/02/15 21:18, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Jonny Grant wrote:
On 01/02/15 16:34, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
Am 01.02.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii :
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
From: Jonathan Wakely
Cc: Andrew Pinski , "gcc@gc
On 2 February 2015 at 21:11, Jonny Grant wrote:
> Is this a consensus agreement to rename those .C -> .cc ?
No.
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Jonny Grant wrote:
>
>
> On 01/02/15 16:34, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Am 01.02.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii :
>>>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
From: Jonathan Wakely
Cc: Andrew Pinski , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org"
,
On 01/02/15 16:34, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
Am 01.02.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii :
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
From: Jonathan Wakely
Cc: Andrew Pinski , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , Jonny
Grant
These files are only compiled by GCC's own build system, with GCC's
o
On Fri, 2015-01-30 at 23:24 +0100, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix)
wrote:
> > Am 30.01.2015 um 22:39 schrieb DJ Delorie :
> >
> >
> > pins...@gmail.com writes:
> >> No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
> >
> > However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
> >
> Am 01.02.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Eli Zaretskii :
>
>> Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
>> From: Jonathan Wakely
>> Cc: Andrew Pinski , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" ,
>> Jonny Grant
>>
>> These files are only compiled by GCC's own build system, with GCC's
>> own makefiles, so we know we invoke the C
> Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:55:29 +
> From: Jonathan Wakely
> Cc: Andrew Pinski , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" ,
> Jonny Grant
>
> These files are only compiled by GCC's own build system, with GCC's
> own makefiles, so we know we invoke the C++ compiler and so the
> language isn't inferred from the fi
> From: DJ Delorie
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Jonny Grant
> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:39:51 -0500
>
> However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
> (Windows) and use .cc or .cxx for C++ files ("+" is not a valid file
> name character on Windows, so we can't use .c++).
Actually,
> Am 31.01.2015 um 21:21 schrieb DJ Delorie :
>
>
>> Aren't current Windows file systems case-preserving? Then they
>> shouldn't have no problems with .C files.
>
> They are case preserving, but not case sensitive. A wildcard search
> for *.c will match foo.C and bar.c, and foo.c can be opene
> Aren't current Windows file systems case-preserving? Then they
> shouldn't have no problems with .C files.
They are case preserving, but not case sensitive. A wildcard search
for *.c will match foo.C and bar.c, and foo.c can be opened as FOO.C.
31.01.2015 14:10, Florian Weimer writes:
> Aren't current Windows file systems case-preserving? Then they
> shouldn't have no problems with .C files.
They are, but with some limitations: you can't create two files with
names differing only by case. I didn't try API functions, but here is
how it
* DJ Delorie:
> pins...@gmail.com writes:
>> No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
>
> However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
> (Windows) and use .cc or .cxx for C++ files
Aren't current Windows file systems case-preserving? Then they
shouldn't have no p
John Marino writes:
> Even if this issue is normally hidden due to gcc's makefiles
There are no makefiles involved.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
On 1/31/2015 02:55, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 30 January 2015 at 21:39, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>
>> pins...@gmail.com writes:
>>> No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
>>
>> However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
>> (Windows) and use .cc or .cxx for C++ files
> Am 31.01.2015 um 02:57 schrieb Jonathan Wakely :
>
> On 30 January 2015 at 22:24, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
>> Apple’s HFS is, on a default OS X install, case insensitive.
>
> Which doesn't matter, see my previous reply.
That is true; though its good to keep an eye out for it.
>
On 30 January 2015 at 22:24, Kevin Ingwersen (Ingwie Phoenix) wrote:
> Apple’s HFS is, on a default OS X install, case insensitive.
Which doesn't matter, see my previous reply.
> But .c++ is valid. .cxx sounds pretty straight forward to me, since people
> also use the $CXX variable.
We already
On 30 January 2015 at 21:39, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> pins...@gmail.com writes:
>> No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
>
> However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
> (Windows) and use .cc or .cxx for C++ files ("+" is not a valid file
> name character on Window
> Am 30.01.2015 um 22:39 schrieb DJ Delorie :
>
>
> pins...@gmail.com writes:
>> No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
>
> However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
> (Windows) and use .cc or .cxx for C++ files ("+" is not a valid file
> name character on
> Am 30.01.2015 um 21:30 schrieb Jonny Grant :
>
>
>
> On 30/01/15 17:09, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:22 AM, Jonny Grant wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> When I checked out from the trunk I saw that various files had .C
>>> capital extension. Its not a big
pins...@gmail.com writes:
> No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
However, we should avoid relying on case-sensitive file systems
(Windows) and use .cc or .cxx for C++ files ("+" is not a valid file
name character on Windows, so we can't use .c++).
On 30/01/15 17:09, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:22 AM, Jonny Grant wrote:
Hello
When I checked out from the trunk I saw that various files had .C
capital extension. Its not a big issue.. but I wondered if they should
be .c like regular source files?
No because they a
> On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:22 AM, Jonny Grant wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> When I checked out from the trunk I saw that various files had .C
> capital extension. Its not a big issue.. but I wondered if they should
> be .c like regular source files?
No because they are c++ code so capital C is correct.
31 matches
Mail list logo
