Re: Update coding standards wrt. C99?

On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 9:32 AM Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> wrote: > Hi all, > > since master requires (mostly) C99 compliant compilers anyway, I wonder > if we like to update our coding standards[1], to reflect: > > * that we require (mostly) C99 compliant compilers (instead of ANSI-C > compliant compilers) > > * that mixing of declarations and statements is fine > Sounds good. This restriction going away has been a great quality of life improvement when working on master. > * that C++ style comments are now allowed, or maybe that they are still > forbidden (in the latter case the stated reasons should be updated) > It seems like in practice the style is basically /* */ for most comments and // for TODO comments. Not sure how that came about :) No strong opinion on whether to keep it that way or not. We may also consider to drop the "Documentation and folding hooks"[2] > section; besides that it is already partially outdated (AIUI, > doc/genfuncsummary is superseeded by doc/docgen for a long time), I > don't think these folding markers encapsulating each individual function > are useful nowadays. > Yes, this section should be dropped. We should also drop all existing folding marks when someone has time to come up with the right regular expressions for that. They're a lot of noise, regularly broken and not actually needed by any decent tooling (including vim, no idea about emacs, but I would be very surprised if it did not support code structure based folding). Regards, Nikita