@techee commented on this pull request.

In src/tagmanager/tm_source_file.c:

> +	if (source_file->lang == TM_PARSER_C || source_file->lang == TM_PARSER_CPP)
+	{
+		const gchar **ext;
+		const gchar *common_src_exts[] =
+			{".c", ".C", ".cc", ".cp", ".cpp", ".cxx", ".c++", ".CPP", ".CXX", NULL};
+
+		for (ext = common_src_exts; *ext; ext++)
+		{
+			if (g_str_has_suffix(source_file->short_name, *ext))
+			{
+				source_file->is_c_source = TRUE;
+				break;
+			}
+		}
+	}
+

source_file->is_source = TRUE;

Yes, we could do that - makes probably more sense as the is_source flag is valid for all languages and not specific to C/C++.

	if (source_file->lang == TM_PARSER_C || source_file->lang == TM_PARSER_CPP)
	{
		const gchar *ext = strrchr(source_file->short_name, '.');

		if (! ext)
			source_file->is_source = FALSE;
		else
		{
			int i;
			const gchar *common_src_exts[] =
				{"c", "C", "cc", "cp", "cpp", "cxx", "c++", "CPP", "CXX"};

			for (i = 0; i < G_N_ELEMENTS(common_src_exts); i++)
			{
				if (strcmp(ext + 1, common_src_exts[i]) == 0)
					break
			}

			source_file->is_source = (i < G_N_ELEMENTS(common_src_exts));
		}
	}

Does this code offer any benefit compared to what I wrote? I personally find my code a bit easier to read as you avoid the extra branch where . is not found and one also has to think a bit when looking at

source_file->is_source = (i < G_N_ELEMENTS(common_src_exts));

what exactly it means.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: <geany/geany/pull/3490/review/1418526375@github.com>