Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> writes: > On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 08:45:43AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 10:23:34AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 05:15:07AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote: >> > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 01:24:39PM +1030, Yuri Vilmanis wrote: >> > > > Removed some dead code relating to C++. As no part of the codebase >> > > > will ever be seen by a C++ compiler, any code protected by >> > > > #ifdef__cplusplus will *never* get past the preprocessor, and so can >> > > > be safely removed. The files in which these guards appear are not >> > > > valid C++ anyway, so removing these references to C++ should reduce >> > > > future confusion on this issue. The C++ wrapper "fobs" (or other >> > > > C++ wrappers I'm not aware of) can be used by anyone requiring C++ >> > > > support. >> > > >> > > OK to apply this patch? >> > >> > all the versions should be bumped a little at least so user apps >> > could detect if these macros are there or not >> > >> > now about the patch itself, i have no real oppinion on this, it where >> > c++ people who wanted it, and now its one c++ developer who wants it >> > removed, i think that the people who wanted this (see svnlog i dont >> > remember at all) should at least get a chance to comment first >> >> Opinions are (unsurprisingly) mixed. >> >> I agree that we should have this either on all or none of our public >> header files and I vote for removing it everywhere for consistency. >> Baptiste and Reimar seem to be with me on this one. > > Michael? Mans? Well, I personally never use C++, so I wouldn't mind it being removed. It's not pretty, and it doesn't play nicely with emacs' automatic indentation. -- M?ns Rullg?rd mru at inprovide.com
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4