On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Lex Trotman elextr@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 January 2016 at 08:00, Jiří Techet techet@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Thomas Martitz kugel@rockbox.org
wrote:
Am 06.01.2016 um 21:12 schrieb Jiří Techet:
It's indeed at least interesting to consider, because at least for.h
headers there really is some mixed stuff all over the place --even,
simply look in Scintilla's source tree.+1 for having the headers parsed/lexed by the C++ parser (with sources
it
may be a bit dangerous and typically the sources have the right C++ extension).
Not replying to Jiří specifically.
-1. .h is legitimately a C, it's just that many people get it wrong.
And I
don't want C++ keywords highlighted in C headers while they are not highlighted it C source files. This is just confusing.
I agree with Matthew here - I think the "damage" caused by parsing C
headers
with the C++ parser/lexer is much smaller than vice versa. Actually a few months back a user of my ProjectOrganizer plugin wrote me just because of that - he had a C++ project with "h" headers and was surprised that tag generation didn't work for him.
I created (a highly sophisticated) pull request here:
https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/857
Power users can always add *.h back to C types but I think having it in
C++
is a better default.
As the failing tests show, better have a BIG warning about breaking change if we do this.
Fixed now.
Actually the tests "failed" because the tested files were C++ headers and the previously-generated tags files were incorrect because of the used C parser. So yeah, BEWARE USERS, HEADERS MIGHT BE PARSED CORRECTLY :-)
Jiri