On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 02:32:34 -0700 Matthew Brush mbrush@codebrainz.ca wrote:
"Do you agree it would be better for Geany to use standard C types as opposed to GLib types which are typedef'd to the exact same thing?" (ex. gint->int, glong->long, gchar->char etc.)
Yes.
- I left gboolean where it would break a function signature with respect
to GCC warnings.
Understandable.
- I left all guchar, gushort, guint, gulong, etc types, because, lets be
honest, it's just nicer to type.
In my Geany [2013-06-16], there are 43 guchar, gushort and gulong; 475 guint, 1420 gint and 2091 gchar. It is easier to type guint instead of unsigned - the keys are near - but it is worth to mix the standard and GLib types?
Personally I'm using gchar if a string may be UTF-8, and char where it's guaranteed to be ASCII or it's unknown and doesn't matter - to remind me that such string is logically not a direct array of char.
- I think patch includes changes to stdint types (ex. gint16, guint32)
but I think we shouldn't change these as GLib assures them and the C99 standard does not in theory (and is not many in use).
AFAIK GLib does not emulate unexistent integer types. If they exist && we are using C99, they will be defined as u/intN_t.
--
IMHO, Colomban summed up pretty well why there's no compelling reason to adopt C99. My 2 euro-cents:
I think I missed this summation, will re-read thread.
The entire mail from Sat, 17 Aug 2013 09:07 +0000. Though you will probably disagree it's a nice summary, that's subjective.
- If you think that everyone who completed university in the last 14
years uses C99, that's not quite the case. [...]
The smiley face in the sentence you didn't quote but are responding to means I was joking/being sarcastic.
Sorry, missed that. I read the entire discussion at once.
Now to change my opinion somewhat: I'm not against C99 if we kill the redundant g* definitions. I simply don't like them.
We'd better keep gboolean if bool generates warnings, since it has a logical meaning, and I'll keep gchar in Scope for the same reason.