On 09/11/2011 01:27 PM, Pierre-André Jacquod wrote:
What's the best thing to do :
- to keep objective C++ parts ?
- to replace objective C++ by plain (with or without boost) C++ ?
for me there are already too many languages and flavour of languages. I
would stay with plain C++, not adding objec
Hello,
What's the best thing to do :
- to keep objective C++ parts ?
- to replace objective C++ by plain (with or without boost) C++ ?
for me there are already too many languages and flavour of languages. I
would stay with plain C++, not adding objective C++ on top
Just my feelings
regar
Hello,
I got this comment of a cppcheck developper :
is this objective c++? Can the code be replaced in the tokenizer
with plain C++ somehow?
He seems to be right about objective C++. Then I made a opengrok research, 4
files use "@try". Perhaps, there are other files which use "@ expression",
si
Hello,
Following the pb "cppcheck duplicateExpression", I found why the
"duplicateExpression" wasn't detected on salframe.cxx from aqua part.
It's due to the @ use, for example @try, @catch and other things like this.
As soon as the "@ parts" are commented out, detection works.
I created the tick
