[Geany-devel] C/C++ Header filetypes / templates
elextr at xxxxx
Wed Nov 12 13:57:22 UTC 2008
Nick, I was up late watching the late movie, so here's a quick agreement.
2008/11/13 Nick Treleaven <nick.treleaven at btinternet.com>
> Just to reply to the quick points:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:23:47 +1100
> "Lex Trotman" <elextr at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Having separate C++ header templates with the mark already in it
> > > > would help users to remember to add it. BTW it would be good to
> > > > have
> > >
> > > I don't think we should encourage people to make C++ header files
> > > with a .h extension, they should use an extension unique to C++.
> > >
> > I entirely agree!! Unfortunately a couple of old compilers don't and
> > there is lots of code out there using .h files. I blame Stroustrup,
> > who only uses .h for headers throughout his book, even though he
> > acknowledges .cpp .cxx etc.
> OK, but I don't think any default templates that come with Geany should
> need the C++ comment mark.
Yeah if the delivered header templates were only for .hpp they wouldn't need
it. I guess the C++ mark just needs to be clearly documented for those
cases where a C++ .h already exists or is forced by external circumstance.
Saw your comment on removing filetype templates on another post, sounds like
a clean solution. Delivering data files makes it easy for users to tinker
and saves you code maintenance.
> > > BTW with custom file templates you can have as many templates as you
> > > like for the same filetype, so you could have header.hpp,
> > > source.cpp, etc template files.
> > >
> > Can those templates be delivered with Geany? For something fairly
> > fundamental it shouldn't require every user to configure it.
> Basically this needs some work, but will get done some time. But the
> point is that custom file templates support is already implemented, so
> this isn't another reason to add header filetypes.
Of course not, templates is completely separate from the header file
operation problem. Thats why I left it down here.
> > > > In terms of using make object, the .h doesn't compile to a .o
> > > > file so thats no good, and I have to admit I don't quite see how
> > > > make could
> > >
> > > I meant when you have a foo.h file and a foo.c file, you can use
> > > Make Object on the foo.h file.
> > >
> > I still don't understand how this compiles the .h only, sorry for
> > being obtuse.
> It doesn't, it compiles the .o, but (when you have foo.c) it
> catches any errors in the header.
Oh, Ok, but then I get all the cascade errors in the .cpp file caused by the
errors in the .hpp file, the idea is to compile the header first before
using it. I need to do that not only on initial creation but on changes
during debugging, adding functionality etc. Basically any time I modify the
hpp file significantly. Lets see what we can come up with IRO the main
> > > This would cause more code to maintain, and more checks for header
> > > filetypes as well as the source file filetypes.
> > Surprisingly little code, Geany is pretty well structured but there
> > are some hacks needed where filetype checks are hard coded.
Take this comment as the complement it was meant to be. I am not intending
to tell you how much work to take on as a maintainer.
> I think it is significantly more for maintenance/writing new
> Geany-devel mailing list
> Geany-devel at uvena.de
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Devel