Jean-Marc Saffroy <[email protected]> wrote: > Consider an old but actively maintained code base such as the binutils > project: most of the code is written as ANSI C, but some pieces of K&R > remain here and there, mixed with ANSI. For example see: > http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/sim/m32r/sim-if.c?rev=1.13&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-m > arkup&cvsroot=src > So it's probably not a good idea to separate parsing for ANSI and K&R yet. > When will it be then? It could be in a very long time...
OK. K&R is forever. > Also I have to say I agree with this comment sent earlier: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-global/2011-04/msg00015.html > > In support of this comment, I can say it's common that I don't find a > definition with a normal definition search: in this case, a symbol search > works most of the time. Sometimes I do have to use grep (typically when > macros are used to create symbol names from parameters), but it's rather > rare. So for me, the current situation isn't so bad. :) I agree. This simple tool can do only the work of 80%. But the ANSI mode is not so bad. It does the work of 85% in ANSI source code. Since new programs are sure to be written by ANSI style, the ANSI mode is significant, I 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
