Re: [dev] c++-style comments [was fsbm]

From: koneu <koneu93_AT_googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 18:37:04 +0100

On November 6, 2014 6:34:17 PM CET, Louis Santillan <lpsantil_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>There is one case where C++ style comment create a useful feature that
>I
>don't believe C style comments are able to replicate. Some might
>disagree.
>In a color syntax highlighting editor in a C99 codebase, you can prefix
>C
>style comments with C++ style comments and get single character feature
> enable/disabling.
>
> //* Remove first / to disable this block
> doSomething();
> //*/
>
> In a color syntax highlighting editor, doSomething(); takes on normal
>highlighting when enabled, and takes on comment colored highlighting
>when
> disabled. Visually, that's slightly improved over something like
>
> #ifdef DEBUG
> doSomething();
> #endif
>
>where you need to know what defines are created in your codebase, and
>maybe
>there is a clash with a header or deep in the header chain, and you
>need to
> know what defines are created on the command line.
>
>On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Dimitris Papastamos <sin_AT_2f30.org>
>wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 10:28:51AM -0500, Bobby Powers wrote:
>>> Can someone explain why they think /* */ sucks less than // ? It
>>> doesn't seem like it is for compatibility when st and dwm require
>C99
>>> anyway. An internet search did not turn up much, apologies if I've
>>> missed an obvious link or previous discussion.
>>
>> For consistency with multiline comments and for allowing the code
>> to compile with C89.
>>
>> Also // looks terrible.
>>
>> And no, the fact that /* */ cannot be nested is not an argument in
>> favor of //.
>>

You disgust me.
Received on Fri Nov 07 2014 - 18:37:04 CET