Xref:	news-dnh.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:551
Path:	news-dnh.mv.net!mv!news.sprintlink.net!demon!chocolat.demon.co.uk!PS
From:	Paul Shirley <PS AT chocolat DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: c++ comments
Date:	Sat, 24 Jun 95 02:23:41 GMT
Organization:	a loose end.
Lines:	41
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 950623085435 DOT 2031A-100000 AT physics DOT ubc DOT ca> <803925756snz AT chocolat DOT demon DOT co DOT uk> <3sf3dn$4i6 AT odin DOT diku DOT dk> <3sfbl8$pvt AT agate DOT berkeley DOT edu>
Reply-To:	PS AT chocolat DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
To:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Dj-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

           korpela AT albert DOT ssl DOT berkeley DOT edu "Eric J. Korpela" writes:

;)Morten Welinder <terra AT diku DOT dk> wrote:
;)>void
;)>main ()
;)>{
;)>  printf ("%d\n", 10 //* 
;)>                  2 // 1 */
;)>         );
;)>}
;)>
;)>This program should print 10, not 5.
;)
;)Or even better the compiler should print...
;)
;)t1.c: In function `main':
;)t1.c:4: warning: implicit declaration of function `printf'
;)t1.c:6: parse error before `)'
;)
;):)
;)
;)I do agree with your point, though.  The C++ comment convention
;)should be used for C++.  After all, it's a different language.
;)
;)Even though the compiler can understand both [C and C++], one shouldn't
;)mix the two in the same file.  You don't see anyone trying to put
;)Fortran comments in their C code.


What annoys me is the way that there *is* a flag to allow C++ comments,
but its undocumented,unsupported and almost impossible to use!
(And if you don't believe me.. try compiling C++ code with the C-C++
flag and watch it fail to locate any C++ headers, it really is C++ in C)

More to the point, in a world full of PC compilers that default to allowing
this, gcc should at least allow the option. (I'd build it into the gcc
code if I actually used C ;)

-- 
Paul Shirley: SemiProfessional Coffee & Chocolate Taster

- Raw text -