From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Akib Azmain Turja Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: [C source] Inconsistent comments on preprocessor conditionals Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2022 18:47:33 +0600 Message-ID: <87sfnb3h5m.fsf@disroot.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3510"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 08 14:49:18 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1o9nQ5-0000gt-Bh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 14:49:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37632 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o9nQ4-0004w4-2e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 08:49:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52830) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o9nOe-0003WU-Cv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 08:47:48 -0400 Original-Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([178.21.23.139]:34486) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o9nOc-00017Y-QW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2022 08:47:48 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by disroot.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D5F40F2A for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2022 14:47:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: SPAM Filter at disroot.org Original-Received: from knopi.disroot.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (disroot.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kp89sHh_0b7u for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2022 14:47:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail; t=1657284462; bh=HnxbjTZFo/dfzCElr+5A8qtjvB4dyAEQsCgRCNFdMiA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date; b=CL9IEvI7/TH+Q41zAOWpMIt10x3du9d9akPGWrSz8QcoZuwptU/ZHFiDO6qXkwAh+ vVzYJjlbuoAt8L1cOJKmvsZwTykjvGpy34/gov1oz3S/cSUfOjWefxq+WXe2WPjoH5 YrdkqAqepBsa17d3GWe45/3YS4jnG4XogaPrXovmh9zgS2D/zMOXBfslTk334oMB0R x1mtDrrg+CC03l3Axrms1mr8Qvm4KC1ZzkNTA/6nq41yaoSTjZpvfnj9f9ldAbphhn zxyZbUaHkOXwIssEduhfZJnPdVu3MTtkbJNCTJhUdD7Sj+i1xuM5jdEJdJoP5r7uBp wU4qcTO9f/oqQ== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.21.23.139; envelope-from=akib@disroot.org; helo=knopi.disroot.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:291955 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In some parts of the C source, preprocessor conditionals are commented like the following: =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- #ifdef FOO ... #else /* not FOO */ ... #endif /* FOO */ =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I became confused at the first glance. But after seeing like the following in some other part: =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- #ifdef FOO ... #else /* not FOO */ ... #endif /* not FOO */ =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I became even more confused. Why it's inconsistent? And what should I do when adding new conditional blocks? Should I follow the GNU coding standards (the second one)? =2D-=20 Akib Azmain Turja This message is signed by me with my GnuPG key. It's fingerprint is: 7001 8CE5 819F 17A3 BBA6 66AF E74F 0EFA 922A E7F5 --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEyVTKmrtL6kNBe3FRVTX89U2IYWsFAmLIJ2UACgkQVTX89U2I YWtZaQ//fpcLBvYNEmjAI1YlKyyOFnDB7ikXTc2nk9PjGBsujzDdb2lDRxar2tN9 X/yTmNvfzhLXxH96gNHkWnTH3beCBasRKbiPLEtI1kR40RH1u2a5LrQALlsDYmpx va1FLK9cr1semOfk/d0s1DR1hYQTK9CgorxT8jzG2Vz4LQ2Hf2Z0WeTaXZTr1RH7 C3nE7+I+jBNchJ8As4YIV45qKTPCVJsq/YJBkr/b068voTa9nY2uqb0DJuSbJxy8 1pEYHF3c4AAsyLgL6UeZ8gHJMwvhVYkF5Z2DRtXZkjcZRZDyBOJ1EaSSdcEkStdN QF6pl/PukEqPqyuzi7aj0mlnJWmZeoxqXhJhuZeg4CcvnxJgjhhSTlsFX8YPHEis OHDxY006jPdMDaHaQfxVg3jUNNEW3ENiSctfxgrWRVG6EPWSOFU8om9PvfvPBtWP uQCSiu7Z5mPxNHb0UNpx4XU2SRneRIQ79Lj00FASnd2sQaVTYLHp5a5TC2BxLaO2 rw5hQeeZsE923co3H7nAUs482Id8l+rrme5X6Me4arBCWyPqxlX6PsCUiY+Qz0nG r9LFKXNqhVVsIxQjnyoPC+gx8tzv5ud7zDld5F1A3LRQuUYZGpFTLb8c3RwSdUKa pOz5Lqs7pEi8GDu5/6mCpQeIBtS0kiXgxBirszo+hBmhzfqTwJs= =YDiZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--