Re: New file extension

2013-08-21 Thread Steinar Bang
> Martin Jambor : > Well, IIRC mostly worries about history. SVN claims to be able to > track history of renamed files but I use the git mirror now and I > wonder what the history would show there. I would consider it very > unfortunate if 'git blame' did not show the .c era history of the >

Re: New file extension

2013-07-31 Thread Martin Jambor
Hi, On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:07:52AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: > > > As far as newbies are concerned, I think that grasping that .c files > > are C++ files is one of the easy things to learn about GCC compared to > > other necessary

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 08:35:12AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote: >> On 07/30/2013 08:27 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >> >On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: >> >>On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >>

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: > As far as newbies are concerned, I think that grasping that .c files > are C++ files is one of the easy things to learn about GCC compared to > other necessary knowledge (which is something we should work on). One more oddities compared to

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > >> I think it is a good idea now (except perhaps for the very few source files >> which could still be compiled by a plain C, not C++, compiler; maybe we >> don't have anymore them...). > >

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 4:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: >> I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c >> suffix and some with .cc suffix would imply some sort of difference >> where there is going to be none. >

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: >>> I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c >>> suffix and some with .cc suffix would imply so

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to suggest that new implementation files have >> the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed >> with a C compiler. (I am not proposing

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Marek Polacek
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 08:35:12AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > On 07/30/2013 08:27 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > >On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > >>On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > >>>On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wr

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Andrew MacLeod
On 07/30/2013 08:27 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c s

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Various Ada runtime library files are also .c under gcc/ada - in general, > I'm not sure which .c files there are used as C, C++ or both, and which > are used for host, target or both; that would require careful > investigation for any renaming. The C files directly under ada/ cannot be renamed

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:51:35AM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > > > I think it is a good idea now (except perhaps for the very few source files > > which could still be compiled by a plain C, not C++, compiler; maybe we > > don't have anymore

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Martin Jambor
Hi, On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: > >> I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c > >> suffix and some with .cc suffi

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Marek Polacek
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: > >> I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c > >> suffix and some with .cc suffix wou

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 30 Jul 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > I think it is a good idea now (except perhaps for the very few source files > which could still be compiled by a plain C, not C++, compiler; maybe we > don't have anymore them...). gcov-io.c is C code used for both host and target (one of the re

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: > >> I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c > >> suffix and some with .cc suffix wou

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: >> I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c >> suffix and some with .cc suffix would imply some sort of difference >> where there is going to be none. >

Re: New file extension

2013-07-30 Thread Marek Polacek
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote: > I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c > suffix and some with .cc suffix would imply some sort of difference > where there is going to be none. Yeah -- this sort of discrepancy I don't like either. In gcc

Re: New file extension

2013-07-29 Thread Martin Jambor
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to suggest that new implementation files have > the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed > with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.) > I do not care very much but I disag

Re: New file extension

2013-07-29 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to suggest that new implementation files have >> the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed >> with a C compiler. (I am not proposin

Re: New file extension

2013-07-29 Thread Marek Polacek
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to suggest that new implementation files have > the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed > with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.) Oh, I suppose this applies to ubsan, e

Re: New file extension

2013-07-29 Thread Diego Novillo
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to suggest that new implementation files have > the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed > with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.) Agreed. Diego.

New file extension

2013-07-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
Hi, I would like to suggest that new implementation files have the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.) -- Gaby