[neomutt-devel] About C flavour (Was: Refactoring's cosmetics ?)
gahr at gahr.ch
Thu Jan 26 15:03:17 CET 2017
On 2017-Jan-26, 14:55, Guyzmo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 02:13:59PM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> > On 2017-Jan-26, 13:26, guyzmo wrote:
> > > I'm not saying we absolutely *shall* enforce C11, but I wouldn't want to
> > > refuse to use a feature that would benefit neomutt because we've made an
> > > executive decision to stick with C99.
> > The are a strong reason for this "executive" decision: upstream isn't
> > going to adopt any C11 code we might write. This should be enough to
> > settle the debate (for the time being).
> let's agree on dis… nah, just kidding ^^
> I don't think we should factor how upstream's working here. As we're
> discussing refactoring in those threads, I think we shall consider that
> neomutt is more than just a mutt+patches, but rather a rework of what it
> > I honestly do not think that our developing experience and productivity
> > would boost by the couple of C11 features we would take advantage from.
> Well, I see four things that could be nice to use:
> - static asserts
> - anonymous struct/union
> - fopen lock thing
> - unicode features
> Anyway, it looks like I'm the only one really suggesting to stay open
> for C11 features usage, so I won't try to push much more the topic.
> → Anybody else agree with my position on keeping an open mind with C11?
> What *REALLY* matters to me, though, is to be ok with full support of
> C99, that means using:
> - `#pragma once`,
`#pragma once` is not standard (not even c11).
> - single line `//` comments,
> - stdbool/stdint,
> - variable and flexible arrays,
I'd say no to VLAs, but I won't stress on that..
> - designated initialisers or
> - struct literals…
> → Everybody agrees that we can, and should, use the most of C99
> features, to make new code elegant?
Yes, I don't think anybody ever objected to this.
gahr at gahr.ch
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 1020 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the neomutt-devel