This feels like the right solution. ANSI C has been around for a long time... I'm pretty sure we'd be able to turn on the ANSI mode, and get the benefit of the better parsing.
Fwiw.. I wonder if old k and r compilers could even handle these wacky macros. (if not.. You might never see these in this files..) Long term, global might need a way to specify ANSI on a file by file basis for really big code bases. (since some code bases may contain both..) (or would the preferred solution be to build multiple tag files (some in k and r, some in ANSI), and the combine them together somehow?) Cheers, --Phil On Apr 27, 2011, at 8:27 PM, "Shigio YAMAGUCHI" <[email protected]> wrote: >> I fully second that. Macros should only be considered on a "best >> effort" basis. > > "best effort" might be making two modes. > > When calmly thinking, the issue becomes complex because I try to > support both ANSI and K&R at the same time. > I'm thinking about making ANSI mode. > > In ANSI mode, it is thought that programs are written only by ANSI style. > The macro problem below can be solved at least in ANSI mode. > >> STRUCT_DEF_MACRO(my_struct, int) struct_instance_name; >> >> void test_func(long dummy1, long dummy2) >> { > > The mode is specified by some environment variable. > > % gtags <= the same behavior as old times > % setenv GTAGSANSIC 1 > % gtags <= ANSI C mode > > The default mode is left as it is. > If everyone agrees, the ANSI mode will become new default mode. > When programs written by K&R disappear from the world, > I would like to delete old mode. > > What do you think? > -- > Shigio YAMAGUCHI <[email protected]> > PGP fingerprint: D1CB 0B89 B346 4AB6 5663 C4B6 3CA5 BBB3 57BE DDA3 _______________________________________________ Bug-global mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-global
