On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:10:32AM +0000, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
> C syntax is already *WAY* too rich. Many of the linux kernel coding
> guidelines are actually a sort of an emphase of this point. […] to be
> polite some things are "not recommended": […] I go a bit farther: no
> enum either
Why not? Sure, it's not real type safety, but it's an annotation that
the compiler can use to warn you about missing or undefined behaviour.
And I didn't mean typedef enum whatever, just plain old:
enum foo { bar, baz };
or
enum { bar, baz } f;
It's not just syntactic sugar; far from it.
> And for namespaces (very usefull for static libs), the cpp is far from
> enough.
So you want real namespaces rather than function prefixes or suffixes as
tends to be the game? Or do you mean something else entirely?
Regards,
Alex Pilon
