@b4n 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;
+			}
+		}
+	}
+

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++.

Yeah, the main reason I suggest this would be to make the init_tag() check simply tag->local = tag_entry->isFileScope && file->is_source rather than having language-specific tests there as well.

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

Merely premature optimization (comparison only compares useful things, and traverse the basename only once), so no, it doesn't really matter.

If it's only a readability issue, you could easily rewrite this ever so slightly like so:

	source_file->is_source = TRUE;

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

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

			for (int i = 0; i < G_N_ELEMENTS(common_src_exts); i++)
			{
				if (strcmp(ext + 1, common_src_exts[i]) == 0)
				{
					source_file->is_source = TRUE;
					break;
				}
			}
		}
	}

anyway, either way is fine.


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/1418568435@github.com>