18.01.14 15:28, Nick Coghlan написав(ла): > I can argue either side, but the biggest potential problem I see with > Serhiy's suggestion is the likelihood of breaking automatic cross > referencing of symbols in most IDEs, as well as causing possible issues > for interactive debuggers. These are at least valid fragments of C > files, even if they're not designed to be compiled independently. > However, if both Visual Studio and gdb can still find the symbols > correctly, even with the ".clinic" extension, then I would consider that > a point strongly in favour of Serhiy's suggestion. Good point. This idea did not come into my mind, and now I am almost ready to give up my proposals. But C allows you to include files with any extensions (.h, hpp, .h++, .c, .cpp, .inc, .gen, etc), and a powerful tool should monitor "#include"s not paying attention to expansions. On the other hand, simpler tools can work with filename masks, and for them it is much easier to add a new extension than to set exclude condition (the last option may not be supported at all). At least it is so with the tools that I use.
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